* Horms ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050801 12:42]: > On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:14:24PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > > * Horms ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050801 12:01]: > > > On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 11:52:48AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > > > > Yes, that was about my intention as well. So, yes, please move forward > > > > with 2.4.27 and 2.6.8 and send a list of recommended updates. > > > > > I need to go through the BTS and see what else could go in. > > > But what I have right now is listed at in the following Changelogs. > > > > > > http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/kernel/trunk/kernel/source/kernel-source-2.6.8-2.6.8/debian/changelog?op=file&rev=0&sc=0 > > > http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/kernel/trunk/kernel/i386/kernel-image-2.6.8-i386-2.6.8/debian/changelog?op=file&rev=0&sc=0
> > from a quick glance at these, there is nothing I could see directly that > > seems inappropriate. What I would however like is that all > > security-releated issues are noted with their cve id. > Agreed. All the CVE entries that I am aware of are in there. > Unfortunately CVE destribtions for kernel bugs are vauge, and it is > often very difficult to determine which bug goes with which CVE and > which patch. Any contributions in this area are more than welcome. > Just drop a a mail to debian-kernel and CC me. Yes, I know that this is sometimes quite hard, and that this is not your fault. Doesn't make me really more happy though :( > > So, please go on with this, and as soon as you are ready, we can upload. > > However, there is one (minor) issue: I want that the version string > > shows up the word "volatile" so that we cannot get into a version clash > > with the standard archive, so please change also that at some > > appropriate time. :) > > Ok, so something like 2.6.8-16 -> 2.6.8-17volatile-1 ? For example, yes. Of course, if you do another upload to unstable, you must make sure that the unstable version is larger than the volatiles one. > > Also, I would like to have kernel images for as many architectures > > included as possible, but I'm not going to wait indefinitly for all > > archs to catch up. > I think the best way would be to get the source into volatile > and then prod the other achitecture maintainers. In the past > this seems to have taken about 2 weeks. But I am happy to put them > somewhere else first if you think that is a good idea. Ok. Please feel free to upload the packages as soon as you consider it appropriate. The source package will however stay in sarge-proposed-updates/volatile until there are enough binary packages (i.e. at least i386, amd64, powerpc) to move it to sarge/volatile (but that shouldn't be an issue for the maintainers to build). Uploading goes to volatile-master.debian.net with anonymous ftp. Cheers, Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
