On 27/05/2013 15:39, W. van den Akker wrote:
> Are thinking about backporting it?
> My production system is running still 1.x
I'd like to, but only once I am completely happy with the packaging. I
have lots of changes lined up for the -2 version that I hope to upload
later in the week. It would also be great to have an answer to my
question about creating transitional packages first.
[adding Laszlo as a CC as he wasn't on the first message, my apologies]
Cheers,
Chris
> On Mon, 2013-05-27 at 13:39 +0100, Chris Boot wrote:
>> On 23/05/2013 14:23, Maykel Moya wrote:
>> > El 23/05/13 07:57, W. van den Akker escribió:
>> >
>> >> Any progress in this? I like to see v2.0 into debian due to ipv6
>> >> logging capabilities.
>> >
>> > Thanks to nice work by Chris Boot ulogd2 finally entered sid[1].
>> > See the ITP[2] for further info.
>> >
>> > Regards, maykel
>> >
>> > [1] http://packages.debian.org/sid/ulogd2 [2]
>> > http://bugs.debian.org/502305
>> >
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Indeed, I have uploaded my ulogd2 package. It would be great if you
>> could have a look and let me know your comments. One of the reasons I
>> did it as a new package was because I simply couldn't see a way of
>> converting the configuration between ulogd-1.x and ulogd-2.x at all;
>> they are very different programs indeed.
>>
>> Now that ulogd-1.x is end-of-life ("All production systems should
>> migrate to the stable series ulogd-2.x as soon as possible as we do
>> not plan to make more 1.x releases."[1]), I'd like to suggest making
>> the ulogd package transitional. Do you support this suggestion?
>>
>> Laszlo: I'd be happy to adopt ulogd to do the transition if you would
>> like.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Chris
>>
>> [1] http://netfilter.org/projects/ulogd/index.html
--
Chris Boot
bootc@bootc.net
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature