Once upon a time, Thomas wrote :
> Should I expect problems if my apt server is running RH 7.3/Apt 0.3 and
> some clients are coming on line and will be running RH 8.0/Apt 0.5? Do
> the two different version interoperate?
No problems whatsoever. Currently apt.freshrpms.net is running 7.3 with apt
0.3 and many 8.0 clients with 0.5 are using it.
Matthias
--
Clean custom Red Hat Linux rpm packages : http://freshrpms.net/
Red Hat Linux release 7.3 (Valhalla) running Linux kernel 2.4.18-10
Load : 0.10 0.11 0.10, AC on-line, battery charging: 100% (1:47)
_______________________________________________
RPM-List mailing list <RPM-List@freshrpms.net>
http://lists.freshrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

No, hits=-495.1 required=5.0
	tests=AWL,DATE_IN_PAST_24_48,T_URI_COUNT_0_1
	version=2.50-cvs

from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC1C54411F
	for <jm@localhost>; Tue,  6 Aug 2002 06:02:53 -0400 (EDT)
from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 06 Aug 2002 11:02:53 +0100 (IST)
from usw-sf-list2.sourceforge.net (usw-sf-fw2.sourceforge.net
    [216.136.171.252]) by dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id
    g72ML1v14021 for <jm-razor@jmason.org>; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 23:21:01 +0100
from usw-sf-list1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.13]
    helo=usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net) by usw-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with
    esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17akgL-00040Q-00; Fri,
    02 Aug 2002 15:14:01 -0700
from h-66-166-21-186.snvacaid.covad.net ([66.166.21.186]
    helo=rover.vipul.net) by usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim
    3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17akeJ-0003q4-00 for
    <razor-users@lists.sourceforge.net>; Fri, 02 Aug 2002 15:11:55 -0700
Re: [Razor-users] False Positives on EFF Messages
<3D4B0146.20604@perkel.com>; from marc@perkel.com on Fri,
    Aug 02, 2002 at 03:01:42PM -0700
From razor-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net  Tue Aug  6 11:07:40 2002

There have been several changes in the trust system recently. We'll start
seeing confidence values published with signatures from tomorrow morning
(around 4AM). This should be resolved then. Please revoke anything you
don't consider spam. It reduces the trust of the person who reported it as
well as the confidence of the signature.
On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 03:01:42PM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> I'm the systems admin for the Electronic Frontier Foundation and I'm using razor
> running under spam assassin there and one my own personal server. Generally it
> works fine with near 0 false positives - except - that almost all the false
> positives I've seen are on messages that originated at EFF.
> So - I am wondering why RAZOR is catching EFF email and how is this happening.
> Below is an example of what I'm talking about.
> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
> Subject: [E-IP] HP backs off DMCA threat - CNET.com
> List-Id: Intelectual Property <eff-ip.eff.org>
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=7.1 required=5.0
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.40 (devel $Id: SpamAssassin.pm,v 1.108
>    SPAM: This mail is probably spam.  The original message has been altered
>    SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future.
>    SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
>    SPAM: Content analysis details:   (7.1 hits, 5 required)
>    SPAM: MAILTO_LINK        (0.1 points)  BODY: Includes a URL link to send an
>    SPAM: RAZOR_CHECK        (7.0 points)  Listed in Razor, see
> Hewlett-Packard Thursday abandoned legal threats it made against security
> analysts who publicized flaws in the company's software.
> In a statement released late Thursday, HP said it would not use the Digital
> Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a controversial copyright law, to pursue a
> loosely-organized team of researchers who demonstrated a bug in the company's
> The following is the company's statement:
> 1) HP is committed to protecting our customer's security environments.
> 2) We have verified that there is a security vulnerability with Tru64 UNIX, the
> details of which were brought to our attention July 18. The problem has now been
> isolated and HP has been preparing a fix, which will be available within the
> 3) We won't comment on the specifics of our discussions with SnoSoft. However,
> we take our customers' security requirements very seriously and have a strong
> track record following industry-standard security practices.
> 4) Where and how the DMCA should be applied is a matter of great controversy.
> The reported letter to SnoSoft was not consistent or indicative of HP's policy.
> We can say emphatically that HP will not use the DMCA to stifle research or
> impede the flow of information that would benefit our customers and improve
> Robin D. Gross - Cyberspace Attorney @ Law - Intellectual Property
> Director - Campaign for Audiovisual Free Expression (CAFE)
> 454 Shotwell Street, San Francisco, CA 94110
> e: robin@eff.org    w: http://www.eff.org