Bug#185523: marked as done (RFA: logcheck -- Mails anomalies in the system logfiles to the administrator)
Your message dated Sat, 19 Apr 2003 22:33:39 +0100
with message-id <20030419213339.GC23379@uk.intasys.com>
and subject line This package has now been adopted.
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 19 Mar 2003 22:02:50 +0000
>From jjm@ixtab.org.uk Wed Mar 19 16:02:49 2003
Return-path: <jjm@ixtab.org.uk>
Received: from ixtab.demon.co.uk [62.49.20.95]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 18vle5-0003Wt-00; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 16:02:49 -0600
Received: from chac (chac.ixtab.ban [172.16.32.5])
by ixtab.demon.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 40E77F514; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 22:02:48 +0000 (GMT)
Received: by chac (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 26B1214F00; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 22:02:48 +0000 (GMT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Jon Middleton <jjm@debian.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: RFA: logcheck -- Mails anomalies in the system logfiles to the
administrator
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.10
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 22:02:47 +0000
Message-Id: <20030319220248.26B1214F00@chac>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.2 required=4.0
tests=HAS_PACKAGE,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01
version=2.44
X-Spam-Level:
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-03-19
Severity: normal
I request an adopter for the logcheck package.
The package description is:
Logcheck was part of the Abacus Project of security tools, but this
version has been rewritten.
.
Logcheck helps spot problems and security violations in your logfiles
automatically and will send the results to you in e-mail.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux chac 2.4.20 #3 Sat Mar 15 14:37:22 GMT 2003 i586
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 185523-done) by bugs.debian.org; 19 Apr 2003 21:33:42 +0000
>From steve@uk.intasys.com Sat Apr 19 16:33:41 2003
Return-path: <steve@uk.intasys.com>
Received: from anchor-post-31.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.89]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 196zxr-0007Ap-00; Sat, 19 Apr 2003 16:33:40 -0500
Received: from portal.intasys.com ([194.217.254.7] helo=smtp.intasys.com)
by anchor-post-31.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1)
id 196zxr-000CLF-0V
for 185523-done@bugs.debian.org; Sat, 19 Apr 2003 22:33:39 +0100
Received: (qmail 23438 invoked by uid 1000); 19 Apr 2003 21:33:39 -0000
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 22:33:39 +0100
From: Steve Kemp <skx@debian.org>
To: 185523-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: This package has now been adopted.
Message-ID: <20030419213339.GC23379@uk.intasys.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="TiqCXmo5T1hvSQQg"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
Delivered-To: 185523-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.6 required=4.0
tests=PGP_SIGNATURE_2,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,USER_AGENT,
USER_AGENT_MUTT
version=2.44
X-Spam-Level:
--TiqCXmo5T1hvSQQg
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
This package, logcheck, has now been adopted by myself.
Steve
---
--TiqCXmo5T1hvSQQg
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+ocCzwM/Gs81MDZ0RAmVnAJ4oxZ7ohesc2jjZYPwd9Lmqpt8lkwCg3JwY
q+aAZxqiQ1pwNc9NGXn4vDg=
=jOpC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--TiqCXmo5T1hvSQQg--
Reply to: