diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/010970.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/010970.html | 211 |
1 files changed, 211 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/010970.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/010970.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..40e6ecacf --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/010970.html @@ -0,0 +1,211 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release dsniff-2.4-0.b1.1.mga2 + </TITLE> + <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" > + <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20%5Bchangelog%5D%20%5BRPM%5D%20cauldron%20core/release%0A%20dsniff-2.4-0.b1.1.mga2&In-Reply-To=%3C1325715391.27397.104.camel%40liliana.cdg.redhat.com%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="010956.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="010971.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release dsniff-2.4-0.b1.1.mga2</H1> + <B>Michael Scherer</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20%5Bchangelog%5D%20%5BRPM%5D%20cauldron%20core/release%0A%20dsniff-2.4-0.b1.1.mga2&In-Reply-To=%3C1325715391.27397.104.camel%40liliana.cdg.redhat.com%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release dsniff-2.4-0.b1.1.mga2">misc at zarb.org + </A><BR> + <I>Wed Jan 4 23:16:31 CET 2012</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="010956.html">[Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release dsniff-2.4-0.b1.1.mga2 +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="010971.html">[Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release dsniff-2.4-0.b1.1.mga2 +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#10970">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#10970">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#10970">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#10970">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>Le mercredi 04 janvier 2012 à 20:09 +0200, Anssi Hannula a écrit : +><i> On 04.01.2012 19:29, Michael Scherer wrote: +</I>><i> > Le mercredi 04 janvier 2012 à 16:16 +0200, Anssi Hannula a écrit : +</I>><i> >> On 04.01.2012 11:54, Michael Scherer wrote: +</I>><i> >>> Le mercredi 04 janvier 2012 à 11:03 +0200, Thomas Backlund a écrit : +</I>><i> >>>> Anssi Hannula skrev 3.1.2012 23:05: +</I>><i> >>>>> On 02.01.2012 12:21, guillomovitch wrote: +</I>><i> >>>>>> Name : dsniff Relocations: (not relocatable) +</I>><i> >>>>>> Version : 2.4 Vendor: Mageia.Org +</I>><i> >>>>>> Release : 0.b1.1.mga2 Build Date: Mon Jan 2 11:18:17 2012 +</I>><i> >>>>>> Install Date: (not installed) Build Host: ecosse +</I>><i> >>>>>> Group : Monitoring Source RPM: (none) +</I>><i> >>>>>> Size : 210074 License: BSD +</I>><i> >>>>>> Signature : (none) +</I>><i> >>>>>> Packager : guillomovitch<guillomovitch> +</I>><i> >>>>>> URL : <A HREF="http://www.monkey.org/~dugsong/dsniff/">http://www.monkey.org/~dugsong/dsniff/</A> +</I>><i> >>>>>> Summary : Network audit tools +</I>><i> >>>>>> Description : +</I>><i> >>>>>> Tools to audit network and to demonstrate the insecurity of cleartext +</I>><i> >>>>>> network protocols. Please do not abuse this software. +</I>><i> >>>>>> +</I>><i> >>>>>> guillomovitch<guillomovitch> 2.4-0.b1.1.mga2: +</I>><i> >>>>>> + Revision: 189630 +</I>><i> >>>>>> - drop epoch, we don't care about updating from mdv anymore +</I>><i> >>>>> +</I>><i> >>>>> We don't? +</I>><i> >>>>> +</I>><i> >>>> +</I>><i> >>>> Oh yes we do. Atleast from 2010.1 +</I>><i> >>> +</I>><i> >>> We did for 1, not for 2 or cauldron or anything else. So as long the +</I>><i> >>> package is not pushed on 1, I think we agreed that people could not care +</I>><i> >>> about upgrade path from Mandriva. +</I>><i> >> +</I>><i> >> Well, I don't like that, IMO we should not remove upgradeability so +</I>><i> >> soon, even if we won't officially support it. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > Well, if we do not officially support it, then we do not support it, +</I>><i> > that's all. There is no "that's unofficially supported" or stuff like +</I>><i> > that. Supported mean "we will do test and fix bug if they happen", and +</I>><i> > not supported mean "we reserve our right to not do anything". +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > And that's exactly what happen right now. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> IMO there is a level between "officially supported" and "we +</I>><i> intentionally break it", which means that we advise against it but do +</I>><i> not hinder people from doing it. +</I> +Yes, there is different levels of support, obviously, since people have +different but that doesn't mean we should rely on them, or try to +officially use them. Again, saying "we support that, so we do that, and +we don't support this, so people are free to do what they want" is +simpler. + +The whole scheme of having "stuff we do", "stuff we do not promise but +try to", "stuff we do not promise and we do not try to" ( or more ) make +things less clear for everybody. Having a non uniform policy will make +things harder for newer packagers ( and for olders too ). + +We have users ( in the past ) that complained about the lack of +reliability of packages on Mandriva. And this was IMHO because we had a +policy of 'we keep everything and we say they are in a section of "maybe +supported"'. The whole message "contribs is not supported but main is" +was simple and yet, too complex to grasp ( because people didn't check +contrib/main before installing anything, ). It was also far from the +truth because some stuff in contribs were more supported than stuff in +main, and thus we were sending mixed messages. + +So we should really stick on what we support, and send a simple, clear +and correct message. + +And I think we need to keep things simple to solve such issues in the +long run. + + +><i> >> But anyway, this affects people doing 2010.1->mga1->mga2 as well... Or +</I>><i> >> are you saying that isn't supported either, and people should do new +</I>><i> >> installs?? +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > We do not support upgrading mdv2010.1 rpms with rpm from mga2, so if a +</I>><i> > maintainer want to remove this, he can. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > Someone doing mdv2010.1->mga1 will end with a mix of mdv2010.1 and mga1 +</I>><i> > if the system is not cleaned, and that's not something we should +</I>><i> > support, not more than mga X + any random repository upgrade to mga X+1 +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > IE, that's not mga1 -> mga2, that's mga1 + 3rd party repo that happened +</I>><i> > to work by chance to mga2. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> I have to strongly disagree with this. If upgrading from 2010.1 to mga1 +</I>><i> is officially supported (and it is), we can't say "you can't upgrade +</I>><i> your mga1 system to mga2 anymore because you have some old pkgs +</I>><i> installed which we never asked you to remove" (assuming no non-mdv 3rd +</I>><i> party repos here). +</I> +First, it doesn't break the whole upgrade. +In fact, if we look carefully, people who were running non supported +software ( ie a package from Mandriva ) will still run the same +unsupported software and the same binary. And upgrade will likely work +without error messages. Because nothing requires dsniff, except its own +subpackage. + +Secondly, it didn't matter much before Guillaume uploaded dsniff. + +1 week ago, anyone who would have upgraded to mga2 with dsniff installed +from mdv would have been in the exact same situation than now, except +nobody cared at all. And the proof that nobody cared is that nobody +pushed the rpm sooner. Would it have been pushed to 1, yes, that would +have breached what we agreed to do. But it was not pushed to 1 ( and I +would say "likely on purpose" ). So the only change with this upload is +for people installing dsniff later. + + +3rd point, the whole point of saying "we do not support this" is not to +say "we don't support, but we should still support it to some extent". +It is to be able to say "we do not support, so the maintainer can clean +it if he want". You are free to support it if you wish, but Guillaume is +also free to not support it, and choose to clean instead ( because epoch +tags are ugly ). + +If we wanted to support upgrading from mdv 2010.1/2 to mga2, or +upgrading people who mix distribution packages ( be it because they do +not know, or on purpose, that's the same problem from a technical PoV ), +it should have been said much sooner. + +I do not understand, could people tell me what did they understood we +would do when we said "we will not support upgrade this after mageia +1" ? + +-- +Michael Scherer + +</PRE> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="010956.html">[Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release dsniff-2.4-0.b1.1.mga2 +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="010971.html">[Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release dsniff-2.4-0.b1.1.mga2 +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#10970">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#10970">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#10970">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#10970">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + +<hr> +<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list</a><br> +</body></html> |