=== EvilJackyAlcine is now known as JackyAlcine === Hurtz_ is now known as Hurtz === yofel_ is now known as yofel [16:38] is it safe to make bug 901675 public? The logs look pretty harmless - they have auth= variables that point to the filename containing the auth, but I can't see the actual auth data anywhere [16:38] penguin42: Error: Bug #901675 not found. [16:38] bad bot! [16:40] penguin42: Agree, looks safe. [16:41] Thanks [16:41] seems to be a common one [16:42] It could be a python or xcb issue - but don't know enough about either to call it [17:25] penguin42: not bad bot, on private bugs he gets a 404, so "not found" is the only thing he can say [17:26] yofel: I thought he used to say 'private' ? [17:26] yes, but LP was changed to return 404 instead of 403 at some point, not sure what the reason was [17:27] ah [17:27] IIRC it was a matter of non-disclosing the existence of a bug in a project [17:33] * penguin42 giggles at bug 907690 - a DoS in squid on Gopher servers - would the last user of a gopher server please stand up? [17:33] Launchpad bug 907690 in squid3 (Ubuntu) "CVE-2011-3205: DoS (memory corruption and daemon restart) or remote Gopher servers. (affects: 1) (heat: 260)" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/907690 [22:49] I was going through the RFP list and found some bugs that request packaging for packages already in Ubuntu... what's the proper way to handle such bugs? [22:52] I'd say close them and maybe direct to backports if they want it in older distributions [22:55] yep, Fix Released, plus a note about backport [22:57] bregma: wait, RFP in Debian or needs-packaging in Ubuntu? [22:59] needs-packaging in Ubuntu [22:59] ah, ok, yea [23:25] does "close" mean mark as "invalid" or as "fixed released"? [23:25] bregma: fix released since it's actually in the archive and the task is known completed [23:33] thanks