On Sat, 7 Jun 2025, Jörn Heissler wrote:
>* Not everyone uses https. I think I've only been doing it for the last
> two years.
>* Often, bugs aren't reported.
I know I have run into the message about busybox wget not supporting
https, though not during installation (for which
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #1055307 [src:busybox] busybox: CVE-2023-39810
Added tag(s) pending.
--
1055307: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1055307
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Hello Michael,
On Mon 19 May 2025 at 02:22pm +03, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> On 19.05.2025 13:52, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> Hello busybox maintainers,
>> I'm looking into the unfixed CVEs for busybox, funded by Freexian's LTS
>> effort. This package is listed as one w
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: busy...@packages.debian.org, debian-l...@lists.debian.org,
1107...@bugs.debian.org
Control: affects -1 + src:busybox
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package busybox
[ Reason ]
It was
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
X-Debbugs-Cc: busy...@packages.debian.org
Control: affects -1 + src:busybox
Please unblock package busybox
[ Reason ]
This release fixes a single bug affecting debian-installer,
namely
Roland Clobus (2025-06-15):
> I've fetched (with dget) both the 1.37.0-5 and 1.37.0-6 packages. Using
> diffoscope I can confirm that the only change between these versions is in
> the file 'debian/config/pkg/udeb'. So for users of busybox outside the scope
> of udebs
only been doing it for the last
two years.
* Often, bugs aren't reported.
* The busybox-udeb version in the repos must be newer than in the initrd.
This might more often happen in testing than in stable because updated
packages are more likely to migrate into testing; the netboot/PXE
im
Your message dated Sat, 07 Jun 2025 21:49:20 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1107392: fixed in busybox 1:1.37.0-6
has caused the Debian Bug report #1107392,
regarding Trixie netboot installation fails / busybox-udeb upgrade replaces
wget utility
to be marked as done.
This means that
Hi,
Michael Tokarev (2025-06-08):
> I just pushed a commit to salsa. Wich removes CONFIG_WGET and 3
> CONFIG_FEATURE_WGET_* options.
Oh, OK, so definitely wget-specific I suppose. :)
> Should I upload another busybox release, or can we wait a bit more
> for maybe other stuff to sh
x27;m happy for you
to clean things up, as long as we don't break other things. :)
I just pushed a commit to salsa. Wich removes CONFIG_WGET and 3
CONFIG_FEATURE_WGET_* options.
Should I upload another busybox release, or can we wait a bit more
for maybe other stuff to show up?
Thanks,
/mjt
Hi,
Michael Tokarev (2025-06-07):
> Hm. Why it replaces /bin/wget? It shouldn't replace already existing
> files, I'd say, and this needs to be fixed.
>
> Yes, we've in d/rules:
> dh_link -pbusybox-udeb \
> $$(grep -v sbin/init $b/udeb/busy
On 07.06.2025 01:35, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Hallo Jörn,
Vielen Dank, lustiges Problem…
Jörn Heissler (2025-06-07):
installing trixie using PXE netboot no longer works for me.
The installation fails with "anna[8234] busybox wget does not support
https" right after the "Loa
Hallo Jörn,
Vielen Dank, lustiges Problem…
Jörn Heissler (2025-06-07):
> installing trixie using PXE netboot no longer works for me.
>
> The installation fails with "anna[8234] busybox wget does not support
> https" right after the "Loading additional components&
Package: installation-reports
Hello,
installing trixie using PXE netboot no longer works for me.
The installation fails with "anna[8234] busybox wget does not support
https" right after the "Loading additional components" step.
The initrd from
https://deb.debian.org/debi
Your message dated Fri, 30 May 2025 17:49:35 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1106796: fixed in busybox 1:1.37.0-5
has caused the Debian Bug report #1106796,
regarding busybox-static: statically linked against glibc without a
Built-Using: field
to be marked as done.
This means that
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #1106796 [busybox-static] busybox-static: statically linked against glibc
without a Built-Using: field
Added tag(s) pending.
--
1106796: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1106796
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 + patch
Bug #1106796 [busybox-static] busybox-static: statically linked against glibc
without a Built-Using: field
Added tag(s) patch.
--
1106796: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1106796
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact
control: tag -1 + patch
Hi,
On 2025-05-29 22:53, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Package: busybox-static
> Version: 1:1.37.0-4
> Severity: serious
> Justification: Policy 7.8
>
> Dear maintainer,
>
> The busybox-static package provides /usr/bin/busybox which is staticall
Package: busybox-static
Version: 1:1.37.0-4
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 7.8
Dear maintainer,
The busybox-static package provides /usr/bin/busybox which is statically
linked against glibc.
glibc is mostly is mostly licensed under the LGPL, which requires that
the full source code of
Hello busybox maintainers,
I'm looking into the unfixed CVEs for busybox, funded by Freexian's LTS
effort. This package is listed as one where the maintainers would like
to be involved in LTS updates. May I ask whether you have any work
pending to fix the CVEs in sid and trixie
On 19.05.2025 13:52, Sean Whitton wrote:
Hello busybox maintainers,
I'm looking into the unfixed CVEs for busybox, funded by Freexian's LTS
effort. This package is listed as one where the maintainers would like
to be involved in LTS updates. May I ask whether you have any work
pend
On 19.05.2025 14:22, Michael Tokarev wrote:
On 19.05.2025 13:52, Sean Whitton wrote:
Hello busybox maintainers,
I'm looking into the unfixed CVEs for busybox, funded by Freexian's LTS
effort. This package is listed as one where the maintainers would like
to be involved in LTS updat
Source: busybox
Version: 1:1.37.0-4
Severity: important
Tags: security upstream
Forwarded: https://bugs.busybox.net/show_bug.cgi?id=16018
X-Debbugs-Cc: car...@debian.org, Debian Security Team
Hi,
The following vulnerability was published for busybox.
CVE-2025-46394[0]:
| In tar in BusyBox
Source: busybox
Version: 1:1.37.0-4
Severity: important
Tags: security upstream
Forwarded: https://bugs.busybox.net/show_bug.cgi?id=15922
X-Debbugs-Cc: car...@debian.org, Debian Security Team
Hi,
The following vulnerability was published for busybox.
CVE-2024-58251[0]:
| In netstat in BusyBox
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + fixed-upstream
Bug #1055307 [src:busybox] busybox: CVE-2023-39810
Added tag(s) fixed-upstream.
--
1055307: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1055307
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tags -1 + fixed-upstream
On Fri, Nov 03, 2023 at 08:26:28PM +0100, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> Source: busybox
> X-Debbugs-CC: t...@security.debian.org
> Severity: important
> Tags: security
>
> Hi,
>
> The following vulnerability was published for busybo
Hi Michael,
(sorry for the late reply, somehow I've missed to send it out...)
On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 09:03:06AM +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> 02.03.2025 13:33, Tobias Frost wrote:
> > Dear Busybox maintainers,
> >
> > currently stable has three open CVEs which
02.03.2025 13:33, Tobias Frost wrote:
Dear Busybox maintainers,
currently stable has three open CVEs which are already fixed for LTS
already but remain unfixed for stable. We'd like to avoid a situation
where people updating from an LTS release to stable and then regress
into having the
Dear Busybox maintainers,
currently stable has three open CVEs which are already fixed for LTS
already but remain unfixed for stable. We'd like to avoid a situation
where people updating from an LTS release to stable and then regress
into having the CVEs not fixed.
For this I'
Package: busybox
Version: 1:1.35.0-4+b3
Severity: wishlist
Dear Maintainer,
While trying to use busybox httpd's proxy feature, I discovered that it
is not enabled in the Debian build [1].
Is there a reason why it is disabled? Could it be enabled? I find busybox
httpd a really simple and u
Your message dated Sun, 6 Oct 2024 21:26:55 +0200
with message-id
and subject line [ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org: Accepted busybox 1:1.37.0-1
(source) into unstable]
has caused the Debian Bug report #1059050,
regarding busybox: CVE-2023-42363
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim
Source: busybox
Source-Version: 1:1.37.0-1
- Forwarded message from Debian FTP Masters
-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2024 10:20:49 +0300
Source: busybox
Architecture: source
Version: 1:1.37.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Dear Debian staff,
Could you please let me know if there are any plans to release a patch for the
Busybox package in the near future regarding the
"https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2022-48174"; vulnerability?
Also, I would like to know if there is an automated CV
Your message dated Tue, 16 Jul 2024 10:19:24 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1071648: fixed in busybox 1:1.36.1-8
has caused the Debian Bug report #1071648,
regarding busybox: FTBFS with Linux 6.8+
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with
On 25/06/2024 20:22, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Michael Tokarev (2024-06-25):
31.12.2023 19:11, Michael Tokarev wrote:
Hi!
There's a debian-specific patch in busybox since 2017 which adds ability
to lift variable name filtering rules for d-i. A comment in there says:
This is not a
Michael Tokarev (2024-06-25):
> 31.12.2023 19:11, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > There's a debian-specific patch in busybox since 2017 which adds ability
> > to lift variable name filtering rules for d-i. A comment in there says:
> >
> &g
31.12.2023 19:11, Michael Tokarev wrote:
Hi!
There's a debian-specific patch in busybox since 2017 which adds ability
to lift variable name filtering rules for d-i. A comment in there says:
This is not a long term fix for this problem: a different approach is
needed to pars
Your message dated Thu, 16 May 2024 19:20:20 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1060134: fixed in busybox 1:1.36.1-7
has caused the Debian Bug report #1060134,
regarding kmod-udeb vs busybox-udeb: agree on who ships depmod
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem
Your message dated Thu, 16 May 2024 19:20:20 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1069864: fixed in busybox 1:1.36.1-7
has caused the Debian Bug report #1069864,
regarding busybox: Please enable "install" applet
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the proble
Your message dated Thu, 16 May 2024 19:50:58 +0200
with message-id <87pltlprwd@hands.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#1071227: busybox-udeb: provides binaries that are also
provided by kmod-udeb (e.g. modprobe)
has caused the Debian Bug report #1071227,
regarding busybox-udeb: provides bi
16.05.2024 20:17, Philip Hands пишет:
Package: busybox-udeb
Severity: normal
User: debian-rele...@lists.debian.org
Hi,
I notice that busybox-udeb provides the following binaries in /sbin:
depmod insmod lsmod modinfo modprobe rmmod
while kmod-udeb provides the same, except located in /usr
Package: busybox-udeb
Severity: normal
User: debian-rele...@lists.debian.org
Hi,
I notice that busybox-udeb provides the following binaries in /sbin:
depmod insmod lsmod modinfo modprobe rmmod
while kmod-udeb provides the same, except located in /usr/sbin.
It would be better if this were
Marco d'Itri (2024-04-26):
> On Apr 26, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>
> > So, should I disable module utils in busybox-udeb now?
> I think so.
I haven't gotten any requests / seen any reasons to keep it; so, yes,
please feel free to remove it whenever is convenient for you
Ok,
I'm removing whole modutils from busybox udeb (besides depmod, this is
lsmod, insmod, rmmod, and modprobe). All these are provided by
kmod-udeb as far as I can see (as symlinks to kod).
--
GPG Key transition (from rsa2048 to rsa4096) since 2024-04-24.
New key: rsa4096/61AD3D98ECD
On Apr 26, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> So, should I disable module utils in busybox-udeb now?
I think so.
> Is kmod udeb ready and used in d-i already, or does it need some
> prep first?
AFAIK it works.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
?
I meant to come back to this after experimenting, then things happened…
I picked kmod at the time because it worked, and because busybox didn't
work, which I summed up in:
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/debian-installer/-/commit/450daf0bd24ee94d4f466ab65908c079ef795145
(plus
Package: busybox
Version: 1:1.35.0-4+b3
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Hi,
BusyBox can provide a simple version of "install" command
(https://busybox.net/downloads/BusyBox.html#install).
Unfortunately, in the package configuration, the options responsible
for enabling this applet a
come back to this after experimenting, then things happened…
I picked kmod at the time because it worked, and because busybox didn't
work, which I summed up in:
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/debian-installer/-/commit/450daf0bd24ee94d4f466ab65908c079ef795145
(plus follow-up co
On Jan 06, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Yes, some utils in busybox aren't as good as regular implementations. For
Yes. Nowadays kmod has many more features related to compressed modules
and verification of signatures.
Can we agree that kmod should provide these programs for d-i?
Or can
file lists of
all udebs and comparing them.
This seems like a more generic problem. I downloaded all amd64 udebs and
the following files (normalized to account for aliasing) pose a
conflict:
From this list, only a few utilities are from busybox, namely wget and module
utilities (depmod/insmod
map.gz
./usr/share/keymaps/i386/qwertz/mac-usb-de_CH.kmap.gz
./usr/share/keymaps/i386/qwertz/mac-usb-fr_CH-latin1.kmap.gz
./usr/share/keymaps/i386/qwertz/mac-usb-pt-latin1.kmap.gz
./usr/share/keymaps/include/compose.latin1.inc.gz
So for busybox and kmod, it's not just depmod, but all the others a
Package: kmod-udeb,busybox-udeb
Severity: serious
Justification: file conflict
X-Debbugs-Cc: Cyril Brulebois , debian-boot@lists.debian.org
Hi Cyril,
On Sat, Jan 06, 2024 at 04:31:44AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> d-i daily builds now FTBFS everywhere due to the merge-usr step, with
&g
Hi!
There's a debian-specific patch in busybox since 2017 which adds ability
to lift variable name filtering rules for d-i. A comment in there says:
This is not a long term fix for this problem: a different approach is
needed to parse the values from the kernel command-line, b
Source: busybox
X-Debbugs-CC: t...@security.debian.org
Severity: important
Tags: security
Hi,
The following vulnerability was published for busybox.
CVE-2023-42366[0]:
| A heap-buffer-overflow was discovered in BusyBox v.1.36.1 in the
| next_token function at awk.c:1159.
https
Source: busybox
X-Debbugs-CC: t...@security.debian.org
Severity: important
Tags: security
Hi,
The following vulnerability was published for busybox.
CVE-2023-42365[0]:
| A use-after-free vulnerability was discovered in BusyBox v.1.36.1
| via a crafted awk pattern in the awk.c copyvar function
Source: busybox
X-Debbugs-CC: t...@security.debian.org
Severity: important
Tags: security
Hi,
The following vulnerability was published for busybox.
CVE-2023-42363[0]:
| A use-after-free vulnerability was discovered in xasprintf function
| in xfuncs_printf.c:344 in BusyBox v.1.36.1.
https
Source: busybox
X-Debbugs-CC: t...@security.debian.org
Severity: important
Tags: security
Hi,
The following vulnerability was published for busybox.
CVE-2023-42364[0]:
| A use-after-free vulnerability in BusyBox v.1.36.1 allows attackers
| to cause a denial of service via a crafted awk pattern
Source: busybox
X-Debbugs-CC: t...@security.debian.org
Severity: important
Tags: security
Hi,
The following vulnerability was published for busybox.
CVE-2022-48174[0]:
| There is a stack overflow vulnerability in ash.c:6030 in busybox
| before 1.35. In the environment of Internet of Vehicles
Your message dated Tue, 12 Dec 2023 15:46:03 +0100
with message-id <20231212144603.ga68...@subdivi.de>
and subject line Re: busybox: possible file loss during upgrade arising from
/usr-merge
has caused the Debian Bug report #1057219,
regarding busybox: possible file loss during upgrade a
Package: busybox
Version: 1:1.36.1-6
Severity: serious
User: helm...@debian.org
Usertags: dep17p1
Hi Chris and Michael,
I am very sorry to tell you that I found a contrieved /usr-merge problem
with the busybox upload. In essence, Conflicts allow for concurrent
unpacks in weired situations. As a
Your message dated Sat, 18 Nov 2023 20:01:31 +0300
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#1039142: busybox: ships sysv-init script without
systemd unit
has caused the Debian Bug report #1039142,
regarding busybox: ships sysv-init script without systemd unit
to be marked as done.
This means
@@ override_dh_installsystemd-indep:
# explicitly list all packages with .service files here
dh_installsystemd -pbusybox-syslogd --name=busybox-klogd
dh_installsystemd -pbusybox-syslogd
-# the following does not work (see #1039142 for details):
-# dh_installsystemd -pudhcpd --no-enable --no
you
> tried should work, but it's hard to say without looking at the
> implementation in details.
Sure thing, it is in current busybox master on salsa, here:
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/busybox/-/blob/master/debian/rules#L172
with udhcpd.service & udhcpd.init in th
rules.
Tagging with "help" for now.
Could you please share a branch or a patch with your attempt? What you
tried should work, but it's hard to say without looking at the
implementation in details.
Sure thing, it is in current busybox master on salsa, here:
https://salsa.debian.org/in
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 18:42:09 +0300 Michael Tokarev
wrote:
> Control: tag -1 + help
>
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 23:20:24 +0100 bl...@debian.org wrote:
> > Package: busybox
> > Severity: important
> > User: bl...@debian.org
> > Usertags: missing-systemd-s
Control: tag -1 + help
On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 23:20:24 +0100 bl...@debian.org wrote:
Package: busybox
Severity: important
User: bl...@debian.org
Usertags: missing-systemd-service
Dear Maintainer(s),
busybox has been flagged by Lintian as shipping a sysv-init script
without a corresponding
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 + help
Bug #1039142 [busybox] busybox: ships sysv-init script without systemd unit
Added tag(s) help.
--
1039142: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1039142
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Your message dated Mon, 13 Nov 2023 18:55:56 +0300
with message-id <9a2028ef-55db-4f09-992b-454cb6d0e...@tls.msk.ru>
and subject line Re: Bug#984816: busybox resume fails to resume with swap file
after hibernation
has caused the Debian Bug report #984816,
regarding busybox resume fails to
Your message dated Mon, 13 Nov 2023 15:15:08 +0300
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#964579: lsblk not included in busybox version used
with installer
has caused the Debian Bug report #964579,
regarding lsblk not included in busybox version used with installer
to be marked as done.
This
Source: busybox
X-Debbugs-CC: t...@security.debian.org
Severity: important
Tags: security
Hi,
The following vulnerability was published for busybox.
CVE-2023-39810[0]:
| An issue in the CPIO command of Busybox v1.33.2 allows attackers to
| execute a directory traversal.
https
Your message dated Thu, 03 Aug 2023 23:20:30 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1039710: fixed in busybox 1:1.36.1-3.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1039710,
regarding busybox-udeb: /var/log/syslog is empty
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been
Processing control commands:
> retitle -1 busybox-udeb: /var/log/syslog is empty
Bug #1039710 [busybox-udeb] debian-installer: Grub installation fails and
/var/log/syslog is empty
Changed Bug title to 'busybox-udeb: /var/log/syslog is empty' from
'debian-installer: Grub inst
Control: retitle -1 busybox-udeb: /var/log/syslog is empty
On 28/06/2023 22:54, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
With a local build, confirmed -3 is buggy, and that reverting only
busybox-udeb to -1 is sufficient to restore syslog support in the
installer.
Confirmed and details to reproduce
Package: busybox
Severity: important
User: bl...@debian.org
Usertags: missing-systemd-service
Dear Maintainer(s),
busybox has been flagged by Lintian as shipping a sysv-init script
without a corresponding systemd unit file. The default init system in
Debian is systemd, and so far this worked
Your message dated Thu, 08 Jun 2023 08:49:12 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#907189: fixed in busybox 1:1.36.1-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #907189,
regarding busybox-syslogd: Please provide systemd .service files (attached)
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
Your message dated Thu, 08 Jun 2023 08:49:12 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#857760: fixed in busybox 1:1.36.1-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #857760,
regarding busybox-syslogd: Needs CONFIG_FEATURE_SYSLOGD_DUP to support
duplicate message suppression (-D option)
to be marked as
21.01.2023 19:49, Michael Tokarev wrote:
..
What's the reason to provide these systemd services for busybox-syslogd?
In my view, busybox-syslogd can be used as a minimal syslogging service
on a bare minimal system without much else besides busybox itself.
On a system with systemd, sy
Your message dated Tue, 6 Jun 2023 17:31:41 +0300
with message-id <9d994014-4330-109f-5040-30c21fc16...@tls.msk.ru>
and subject line Re: Bug#1014243: busybox-syslogd: The 'syslog' daemon is
running, but no configuration file can be found.
has caused the Debian Bug report #10
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 + moreinfo
Bug #907189 [busybox-syslogd] busybox-syslogd: Please provide systemd .service
files (attached)
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
907189: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=907189
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.
Control: tag -1 + moreinfo
On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 16:39:00 +0200 "W. Martin Borgert"
wrote:
Package: busybox-syslogd
Version: 1:1.22.0-19
Tags: patch
Please add systemd .service files to busybox-syslogd.
The attached files are taken from OpenEmbedded and
seem to work on my embedded
Your message dated Sat, 21 Jan 2023 19:52:12 +0300
with message-id <19e888b1-c7be-78af-1b16-e51acc21d...@msgid.tls.msk.ru>
and subject line Re: busybox-static: "ALERT! UUID=xxx does not exist. Dropping
to a shell!" since 1:1.35.0-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #1023503,
r
Hi,
On Fri, 30 Dec 2022 at 23:26, Clément Péron wrote:
>
> Dear Debian Mentors and Busybox Deb maintainers,
>
> This is my first debian package compilation :)
>
> I'm trying to cross compile the busybox deb package (ADM64 -> ARM64).
>
> After reading a bit of
Dear Debian Mentors and Busybox Deb maintainers,
This is my first debian package compilation :)
I'm trying to cross compile the busybox deb package (ADM64 -> ARM64).
After reading a bit of doc on the compilation I do the following steps:
dpkg --add-architecture arm64
apt build-dep -a
Your message dated Sun, 06 Nov 2022 08:49:16 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1023501: fixed in busybox 1:1.35.0-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #1023501,
regarding busybox-static: version 1:1.35.0-3 breaks boot
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 + confirmed
Bug #1023501 [busybox-static] busybox-static: version 1:1.35.0-3 breaks boot
Added tag(s) confirmed.
--
1023501: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1023501
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tag -1 + confirmed
On Sat, 5 Nov 2022 21:18:58 +0100 Robert Luberda wrote:
severity 1023501 grave
retitle 1023501 busybox-static: version 1:1.35.0-3 breaks boot on hppa
and amd64
found 1023501 1:1.35.0-3
notfound 1023501 1:1.35.0-2
On Sat, 05 Nov 2022 13:31:51 + John David
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 1023501 busybox-static: version 1:1.35.0-3 breaks boot
Bug #1023501 [busybox-static] busybox-static: version 1:1.35.0-3 breaks boot on
hppa
Changed Bug title to 'busybox-static: version 1:1.35.0-3 breaks boot' from
&#
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 1023501 grave
Bug #1023501 [busybox-static] busybox-static: version 1:1.35.0-3 breaks boot on
hppa
Severity set to 'grave' from 'normal'
> retitle 1023501 busybox-static: version 1:1.35.0-3 breaks boot on
severity 1023501 grave
retitle 1023501 busybox-static: version 1:1.35.0-3 breaks boot on hppa
and amd64
found 1023501 1:1.35.0-3
notfound 1023501 1:1.35.0-2
On Sat, 05 Nov 2022 13:31:51 + John David Anglin
wrote:
Package: busybox-static
Version: 1:1.35.0-2
Severity: normal
Dear
Hi,
Michael Tokarev (2022-11-04):
> I uploaded a new busybox release today (mostly non-linux changes,
> it now builds on hurd), but thought maybe I should've asked here
> before doing that. But it was too late already.
>
> Should I ask the next time?
Don't wor
Package: busybox-static
Version: 1:1.35.0-2
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
With 1:1.35.0-3, boot ends in initramfs:
Begin: Mounting root file system ... Begin: Running /scripts/local-top ... done.
Begin: Running /scripts/local-premount ... done.
Begin: Waiting for root file system ... Begin
Hi!
I uploaded a new busybox release today (mostly non-linux changes,
it now builds on hurd), but thought maybe I should've asked here
before doing that. But it was too late already.
Should I ask the next time?
Thanks,
/mjt
Bsj
Package: busybox-syslogd
Followup-For: Bug #1014243
Hi,
> What led up to the situation? No idea, I've never touched the configuration
> (that I know of)
>
> What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or ineffective)? not
> sure, it was in a cron daily repo
Package: busybox
Version: 1:1.35.0-1
Followup-For: Bug #789499
Hi,
latest version of busybox can build with clang.
so, we can close this issue.
Best regards,
Nobuhiro
-- System Information:
Debian Release: bookworm/sid
APT prefers unstable-debug
APT policy: (500, 'unstable-
Package: busybox-syslogd
Version: 1:1.35.0-1
Severity: important
X-Debbugs-Cc: tmcconnell...@gmail.com
Dear Maintainer,
What led up to the situation? No idea, I've never touched the configuration
(that I know of)
What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or ineffective)? not
Hi Michael,
On 04/06/2022 10:20, Michael Tokarev wrote:
Ok, it's been almost a month since my initial email here.
If there's no objections, I'll upload the new busybox release tomorrow
(from the "mjt" branch). It's enough waiting :)
Sorry, life has just been
Package: busybox
Version: 1:1.30.1-6+b3
Severity: wishlist
File: /usr/bin/busybox
Is there any reason NOT to enable busybox sha3sums?
(I don't care busybox-udeb or busybox-static.)
https://sources.debian.org/src/busybox/1%3A1.35.0-1/debian/config/pkg/deb/#L280
-# CONFIG_SHA3SUM i
Your message dated Mon, 06 Jun 2022 18:48:58 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#998804: fixed in busybox 1:1.35.0-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #998804,
regarding busybox: please enable bas64
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Mon, 06 Jun 2022 18:48:58 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#999567: fixed in busybox 1:1.35.0-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #999567,
regarding busybox: CVE-2021-42373 through CVE-2021-42386 (fixed in 1.34)
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
1 - 100 of 1033 matches
Mail list logo
