[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#298718: marked as done (RFA: slidentd -- A minimal ident (RfC 1413) daemon)



Your message dated Wed, 06 Apr 2005 03:17:11 -0400
with message-id <E1DJ4ml-0008UL-00@newraff.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#298718: fixed in slidentd 1.0.0-2
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; 9 Mar 2005 14:28:34 +0000
>From shorty@debian.org Wed Mar 09 06:28:34 2005
Return-path: <shorty@debian.org>
Received: from pd9549930.dip.t-dialin.net (salem.ckurz.org) [217.84.153.48] (d0baec429003a8b4e20f0a4f11e8626c)
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1D92Ar-0005Ml-00; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 06:28:34 -0800
Received: by salem.ckurz.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id E1115144F1; Wed,  9 Mar 2005 15:28:31 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 15:28:31 +0100
From: Christian Kurz <shorty@debian.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: RFA: slidentd -- A minimal ident (RfC 1413) daemon
Message-ID: <20050309142831.GA8043@salem.ckurz.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Reportbug-Version: 3.8
Mail-Copies-To: never
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level: 

Package: wnpp
Severity: normal

I request an adopter for the slidentd package.

The package description is:
 It is similar in the purpose to pidentd but with different design
 goals. It's a very small and simple daemon that would not give out
 any sensitive information. In this regard it is not RFC compliant
 (RFC 1413 requires the daemon to be insecure by default).

This is a very simple package, that never encountered much bugs. So this
might also be an interesting package for a new maintainer.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.11
Locale: LANG=POSIX, LC_CTYPE=de_DE@euro (charmap=ISO-8859-15)

-- 
The best and most beautiful things in the world cannot be seen or even touched
- they must be felt with the heart.
                -- Hellen Keller

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 298718-close) by bugs.debian.org; 6 Apr 2005 07:35:42 +0000
>From katie@ftp-master.debian.org Wed Apr 06 00:35:42 2005
Return-path: <katie@ftp-master.debian.org>
Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail)
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1DJ54f-0003Ex-00; Wed, 06 Apr 2005 00:35:41 -0700
Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1DJ4ml-0008UL-00; Wed, 06 Apr 2005 03:17:11 -0400
From: Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@panthera-systems.net>
To: 298718-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.55 $
Subject: Bug#298718: fixed in slidentd 1.0.0-2
Message-Id: <E1DJ4ml-0008UL-00@newraff.debian.org>
Sender: Archive Administrator <katie@ftp-master.debian.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 03:17:11 -0400
Delivered-To: 298718-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level: 

Source: slidentd
Source-Version: 1.0.0-2

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
slidentd, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

slidentd_1.0.0-2.diff.gz
  to pool/main/s/slidentd/slidentd_1.0.0-2.diff.gz
slidentd_1.0.0-2.dsc
  to pool/main/s/slidentd/slidentd_1.0.0-2.dsc
slidentd_1.0.0-2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/s/slidentd/slidentd_1.0.0-2_i386.deb



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 298718@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@panthera-systems.net> (supplier of updated slidentd package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 22:54:00 +0100
Source: slidentd
Binary: slidentd
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.0.0-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@panthera-systems.net>
Changed-By: Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@panthera-systems.net>
Description: 
 slidentd   - minimal ident (RfC 1413) daemon
Closes: 298718 299876
Changes: 
 slidentd (1.0.0-2) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * New maintainer (Closes: #298718).
   * debian/* redone and updated to new policy.
   * debian/postrm: moved update-inetd call from purge) to remove) (Closes: #299876).
Files: 
 3b097735371d7048286b6a8dd25e23ec 623 net extra slidentd_1.0.0-2.dsc
 5e98a6e44538870d234964da195683d0 3381 net extra slidentd_1.0.0-2.diff.gz
 368e7ef068576f6ccd2cc19039294094 29950 net extra slidentd_1.0.0-2_i386.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1-cvs (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkJThxoACgkQHJju87fOx+j8ygCeLo+oGg5tCVqbaoBhCIlRdrVI
2McAoIRZvNtZPOUfO1+Mc11dpg02ooIE
=klpv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: