On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 19:16:09 +0100
Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Adam Wilson wrote:
> > I don't even think I'll need ZFS.
>
> Though once you've tried it, the snapshots feature especially, you
> might never want to use anything else!
>
> > What filesystems does GNU/kFreeBSD
> > support? In the ins
Adam Wilson wrote:
> I don't even think I'll need ZFS.
Though once you've tried it, the snapshots feature especially, you might
never want to use anything else!
> What filesystems does GNU/kFreeBSD
> support? In the installation videos/screenshots I have seen there were
> options for UFS, FAT, an
Adam Wilson wrote:
> Is GNU/kFreeBSD 8 stable enough to be a usable system?
It depends on your use case, and how comfortably you can deal with any
issues or limitations you encounter.
It is my regular OS for desktop, laptop, half a dozen servers
(some in business production use) and half a do
Hi,
Adam Wilson wrote:
> What is the recommended way to install Debian GNU/kFreeBSD 8? The only
> media I have been able to find for 8 is the netboot image (mini.iso),
> which I really don't care to pursue.
This thread mentions a test CD image, which I recommend you try:
https://li
What is the recommended way to install Debian GNU/kFreeBSD 8? The only media I
have been able to find for 8 is the netboot image (mini.iso), which I really
don't care to pursue.
Is GNU/kFreeBSD 8 stable enough to be a usable system? If so, what is
recommended way to install it? Are ther
Hi,
Christoph Egger wrote:
> Cyril Brulebois writes:
> > kfreebsd-9 went away during the transition to kfreebsd-10, and I guess
> > kfreebsd-8 was overlooked/forgotten about because it wasn't being
> > transitioned from. Should probably go away from the archive ent
Hi!
Cyril Brulebois writes:
> Ralf Treinen (2014-12-09):
>> Source: kfreebsd-8
>> Version: 8.3-6+deb7u1
>> Severity: serious
>> Tags: jessie
>> User: trei...@debian.org
>> Usertags: edos-uninstallable
>>
>> Hi, kfreebsd-8 build-depends on gcc-
Your message dated Tue, 9 Dec 2014 18:43:26 +0100
with message-id <20141209174326.ga21...@betterave.cristau.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#772659: kfreebsd-8: build-depends on gcc-4.6
has caused the Debian Bug report #772659,
regarding kfreebsd-8: build-depends on gcc-4.6
to be marked a
Ralf Treinen (2014-12-09):
> Source: kfreebsd-8
> Version: 8.3-6+deb7u1
> Severity: serious
> Tags: jessie
> User: trei...@debian.org
> Usertags: edos-uninstallable
>
> Hi, kfreebsd-8 build-depends on gcc-4.6, which does not exist in jessie.
kfreebsd-9 went away
Source: kfreebsd-8
Version: 8.3-6+deb7u1
Severity: serious
Tags: jessie
User: trei...@debian.org
Usertags: edos-uninstallable
Hi, kfreebsd-8 build-depends on gcc-4.6, which does not exist in jessie.
-Ralf.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
Your message dated Tue, 13 May 2014 13:49:54 +0100
with message-id <537214f2.7020...@pyro.eu.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#747981: kfreebsd-8: non-standard gcc/g++ used for
build (gcc-4.6)
has caused the Debian Bug report #747981,
regarding kfreebsd-8: non-standard gcc/g++ used for build (g
Package: kfreebsd-8
Version: 8.3-6+deb7u1
Severity: important
Tags: sid jessie
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-4.6, gcc-4.6-legacy
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default version of
Your message dated Sat, 08 Feb 2014 15:51:45 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#642468: fixed in kfreebsd-10 10.0-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #642468,
regarding kfreebsd-8|9 does not provide any method to use non-free firmware
blobs
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim
Your message dated Sat, 01 Feb 2014 19:17:09 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#720470: fixed in kfreebsd-8 8.3-6+deb7u1
has caused the Debian Bug report #720470,
regarding kfreebsd-8: CVE-2013-3077: local ip_multicast buffer overflow
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
Your message dated Sat, 01 Feb 2014 19:17:09 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#720476: fixed in kfreebsd-8 8.3-6+deb7u1
has caused the Debian Bug report #720476,
regarding kfreebsd-8: CVE-2013-5209: sctp kernel memory disclosure
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Your message dated Sat, 01 Feb 2014 19:17:09 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#717959: fixed in kfreebsd-8 8.3-6+deb7u1
has caused the Debian Bug report #717959,
regarding kfreebsd-8: CVE-2013-4851: nfsserver applies wrong credentials
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
Your message dated Sat, 01 Feb 2014 19:17:09 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#737181: fixed in kfreebsd-8 8.3-6+deb7u1
has caused the Debian Bug report #737181,
regarding kfreebsd-8: CVE-2013-5691: ifioctl credential checks missing
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
Your message dated Sat, 01 Feb 2014 19:17:09 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#737182: fixed in kfreebsd-8 8.3-6+deb7u1
has caused the Debian Bug report #737182,
regarding kfreebsd-8: CVE-2013-5710: nullfs hardlinks across mounts
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
On 31/01/14 19:44, Robert Millan wrote:
> On 31/01/2014 18:07, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
>> Please could you upload for me the kfreebsd-8/8.3-6+deb7u1 upload which
>> is staged at svn://svn.debian.org/svn/glibc-bsd/branches/wheezy/kfreebsd-8
>> as r5405?
>
> Building a
On 31/01/2014 18:07, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Please could you upload for me the kfreebsd-8/8.3-6+deb7u1 upload which
> is staged at svn://svn.debian.org/svn/glibc-bsd/branches/wheezy/kfreebsd-8
> as r5405?
Building as we speak. Have you tested it?
--
Robert Millan
--
To UN
Hi Robert,
Please could you upload for me the kfreebsd-8/8.3-6+deb7u1 upload which
is staged at svn://svn.debian.org/svn/glibc-bsd/branches/wheezy/kfreebsd-8
as r5405?
Thanks.
- Forwarded message from "Adam D. Barratt" -
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 05:42:44 +
From: "Adam
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
Tags: wheezy
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-bsd@lists.debian.org
Hi,
Please could we also update kfreebsd-8 in wheezy? This has the same
backported patch to disable hardware RNGs, as well as a backlog of
security fixes
#x27;src:kfreebsd-8'.
No longer marked as found in versions kfreebsd-9/9.0-10+deb70.3 and
kfreebsd-9/9.0~svn223109-0.1.
No longer marked as fixed in versions kfreebsd-9/9.2~svn255465-1 and
kfreebsd-9/9.0-10+deb70.4.
> retitle -1 kfreebsd-8: CVE-2013-5691: ifioctl credential checks m
Your message dated Wed, 08 Jan 2014 10:05:57 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#642468: fixed in kfreebsd-11 11.0~svn260207-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #642468,
regarding kfreebsd-8|9 does not provide any method to use non-free firmware
blobs
to be marked as done.
This means that
Your message dated Sun, 06 Oct 2013 21:24:38 +0100
with message-id <5251c706.8000...@pyro.eu.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#725575: kfreebsd-8: FTBFS: ctfconvert: No such file or
directory
has caused the Debian Bug report #725575,
regarding kfreebsd-8: FTBFS: ctfconvert: No such file or dir
Source: kfreebsd-8
Version: 8.3-6
Severity: serious
Tags: jessie sid
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20131006 qa-ftbfs
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on
amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> ===>
Your message dated Mon, 02 Sep 2013 21:16:43 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#721540: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #610252,
regarding kfreebsd-8: failure under Citrix Xenserver VM - panic: vm_fault:
fault on nofault entry
to be marked as done.
This
Your message dated Mon, 02 Sep 2013 21:16:43 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#721540: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #720470,
regarding kfreebsd-8: CVE-2013-3077: local ip_multicast buffer overflow
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
Your message dated Mon, 02 Sep 2013 21:16:43 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#721540: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #602120,
regarding kfreebsd-8: the kernel console should implement civis to get nicer
dialog output
to be marked as done.
This means
Your message dated Mon, 02 Sep 2013 21:16:43 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#721540: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #720476,
regarding kfreebsd-8: CVE-2013-5209: sctp kernel memory disclosure
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Your message dated Mon, 02 Sep 2013 21:16:43 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#721540: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #644718,
regarding kfreebsd-8: /proc/net/dev gives empty statistics
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem
On 01/09/13 20:14, Robert Millan wrote:
> Please remove kfreebsd-8 from unstable as discussed in debian-bsd:
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2013/08/msg00175.html
Another reason for its removal, is that the 8.x kernel series will not
have upstream security support for the jessie tim
Steven Chamberlain:
> On 01/09/13 18:09, Robert Millan wrote:
>> Okay, so let's just remove kfreebsd-8 for now, and make D-I kfreebsd-9 only?
>
> Yes that's what I'd suggest for now.
Request just filed. As for D-I, I made it kfreebsd-9 only, but also
added (opt
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
Hello FTP team,
Please remove kfreebsd-8 from unstable as discussed in debian-bsd:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2013/08/msg00175.html
Thanks!
--
Robert Millan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On 01/09/13 18:09, Robert Millan wrote:
> Okay, so let's just remove kfreebsd-8 for now, and make D-I kfreebsd-9 only?
Yes that's what I'd suggest for now.
Regards,
--
Steven Chamberlain
ste...@pyro.eu.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
Steven Chamberlain:
> Hi,
>
> On 29/08/13 13:58, Robert Millan wrote:
>> Again, if I don't hear anyone against this, I'll go ahead and:
>>
>> - Upload kfreebsd-10 (with abiname=0) to sid.
>> - Make D-I a kfreebsd-9 / kfreebsd-10 dual boot.
>> -
Hi,
On 29/08/13 13:58, Robert Millan wrote:
> Again, if I don't hear anyone against this, I'll go ahead and:
>
> - Upload kfreebsd-10 (with abiname=0) to sid.
> - Make D-I a kfreebsd-9 / kfreebsd-10 dual boot.
> - Request removal of kfreebsd-8.
BTW I'm okay wit
On 23/08/2013 14:16, Robert Millan wrote:
> On 23/08/2013 11:13, Petr Salinger wrote:
>>> Is there any point in keeping kfreebsd-8 in sid?
>>> Just wondering if it's worth the extra work.
>>
>> I am in favour of removal from sid.
>
> Me too. What do yo
On 23/08/2013 11:13, Petr Salinger wrote:
>> Is there any point in keeping kfreebsd-8 in sid?
>> Just wondering if it's worth the extra work.
>
> I am in favour of removal from sid.
Me too. What do you think about the "dual kernel" magic in D-I? I'm
thinking
Is there any point in keeping kfreebsd-8 in sid?
Just wondering if it's worth the extra work.
I am in favour of removal from sid.
Petr
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Is there any point in keeping kfreebsd-8 in sid?
Just wondering if it's worth the extra work.
--
Robert Millan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://l
Package: src:kfreebsd-8
Version: 8.3-7
Severity: grave
Tags: security upstream
Control: found -1 kfreebsd-8/8.0-1
http://security.FreeBSD.org/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-13:10.sctp.asc
> When initializing the SCTP state cookie being sent in INIT-ACK chunks,
> a buffer allocated from the kernel
Processing control commands:
> found -1 kfreebsd-8/8.0-1
Bug #720476 [src:kfreebsd-8] kfreebsd-8: CVE-2013-5209: sctp kernel memory
disclosure
Marked as found in versions kfreebsd-8/8.0-1.
--
720476: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=720476
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact
Processing control commands:
> found -1 kfreebsd-8/8.0-1
Bug #720470 [src:kfreebsd-8] kfreebsd-8: CVE-2013-3077: local ip_multicast
buffer overflow
Marked as found in versions kfreebsd-8/8.0-1.
--
720470: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=720470
Debian Bug Tracking Sys
Package: src:kfreebsd-8
Version: 8.3-7
Severity: grave
Tags: security upstream
Control: found -1 kfreebsd-8/8.0-1
http://security.FreeBSD.org/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-13:09.ip_multicast.asc
> integer overflow in IP_MSFILTER
> An integer overflow in computing the size of a temporary buff
Your message dated Mon, 29 Jul 2013 00:04:06 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#717959: fixed in kfreebsd-8 8.3-7
has caused the Debian Bug report #717959,
regarding kfreebsd-8: CVE-2013-4851: nfsserver applies wrong credentials
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Your message dated Mon, 29 Jul 2013 00:04:06 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#718162: fixed in kfreebsd-8 8.3-7
has caused the Debian Bug report #718162,
regarding kfreebsd-8: FTBFS: ctfconvert: No such file or directory
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem
Source: kfreebsd-8
Version: 8.3-6
Severity: serious
Tags: jessie sid
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20130726 qa-ftbfs
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on
amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> CC='
-host).
http://security.FreeBSD.org/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-13:08.nfsserver.asc
This was fixed in kfreebsd-10 since r244226, but the security
implications for kfreebsd-9 and kfreebsd-8 have just been realised.
The FreeBSD NFS server implementation was not supported in squeeze; the
necessary
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 12:00:45AM +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> On 16/06/13 19:57, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> > Wheezy has both kfreebsd-8 and kfreebsd-9. Shouldn't kfreebsd-8 be dropped
> > now?
>
> Some other things I'm wondering about are:
>
> s
Wheezy has both kfreebsd-8 and kfreebsd-9.
Shouldn't kfreebsd-8 be dropped now?
Definitely, release of jessie should not include kfreebsd-8.
Is there some problem with carrying it now in sid and testing ?
It sounds convenient to keep 8.3 in sid for staging security or stable
up
On 16/06/13 23:49, Christoph Egger wrote:
> I guess there's going to be a 9.2 with the missing stuff soon(ish)?
Most likely, but there's no schedule yet. So I would guess later this
year, and then the first kfreebsd-10 RC sometime next year.
> If so the extra features probably aren't worth the t
On 16/06/13 19:57, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> Wheezy has both kfreebsd-8 and kfreebsd-9. Shouldn't kfreebsd-8 be dropped
> now?
Some other things I'm wondering about are:
stable updates - would we need to keep kfreebsd-8 at least in sid to be
able to do these? If kfreebsd-8
Hi!
Steven Chamberlain writes:
> On 16/06/13 19:57, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
>> Wheezy has both kfreebsd-8 and kfreebsd-9. Shouldn't kfreebsd-8 be dropped
>> now?
>
> I've been wondering about this too.
>
> Upstream released 8.4 this month. It has some new
Hi,
On 16/06/13 19:57, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> Wheezy has both kfreebsd-8 and kfreebsd-9. Shouldn't kfreebsd-8 be dropped
> now?
I've been wondering about this too.
Upstream released 8.4 this month. It has some new features not present
in 9.1, but it is already being
Hi,
Wheezy has both kfreebsd-8 and kfreebsd-9. Shouldn't kfreebsd-8 be dropped now?
Cheers,
Moritz
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://l
Your message dated Sun, 17 Feb 2013 12:02:05 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#694096: fixed in kfreebsd-8 8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze4
has caused the Debian Bug report #694096,
regarding kfreebsd-8: CVE-2012-4576
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt
testing
APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: kfreebsd-amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: kFreeBSD 9.0-2-amd64-xenhvm
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
diff -u kfreebsd-8-8.1+dfsg/debian/changelog
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> # CVE-2012-4576
> found 694096 8.2-15~bpo60+1
Bug #694096 {Done: Christoph Egger } [kfreebsd-8]
kfreebsd-8: CVE-2012-4576
There is no source info for the package 'kfreebsd-8' at version
'8.2-15~bpo60+1' with archit
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> unarchive 686961
Bug #686961 {Done: Christoph Egger } [kfreebsd-8]
CVE-2012-3549: kfreebsd SCTP DoS
Unarchived Bug 686961
> unarchive 677297
Bug #677297 {Done: GNU/kFreeBSD Maintainers }
[kfreebsd-8] kfreebsd-8: cve-2012-0217
Unarchiv
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> # CVE-2012-4576
> found 694096 8.2-15~bpo60+1
Bug #694096 {Done: Christoph Egger } [kfreebsd-8]
kfreebsd-8: CVE-2012-4576
There is no source info for the package 'kfreebsd-8' at version
'8.2-15~bpo60+1' with archit
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> # CVE-2012-5363
> # CVE-2012-5365
> found 690986 8.2-15~bpo60+1
Bug #690986 [kfreebsd-8] CVE-2012-5363 CVE-2012-5365
There is no source info for the package 'kfreebsd-8' at version
'8.2-15~bpo60+1' with architectu
Your message dated Fri, 23 Nov 2012 23:18:22 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#694096: fixed in kfreebsd-8 8.3-6
has caused the Debian Bug report #694096,
regarding kfreebsd-8: CVE-2012-4576
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> #kfreebsd-8 (8.3-6) unstable; urgency=medium
> #
> # * Apply patch for SA-12:08 / CVE-2012-4576:
> #memory access without proper validation in linux compat system
> #(Closes: #694096)
> #
> limit source kfreebsd-8
package: kfreebsd-8
severity: serious
version: 8.1+dfsg-8
Hi, a security advisory was issued for freebsd, and kfreebsd-8 is affected:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-announce/2012-November/001440.html
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package kfreebsd-8
kfreebsd-8 (8.3-5) unstable; urgency=medium
[ Robert Millan ]
* Remove /boot symlink kludge. (Closes: #672255)
[ Christoph Egger ]
* Import
Your message dated Sun, 22 Jul 2012 22:48:45 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#677738: fixed in kfreebsd-8 8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze3
has caused the Debian Bug report #677738,
regarding kfreebsd-8: Reference count errors in IPv6 code
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Your message dated Sun, 22 Jul 2012 22:48:45 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#677297: fixed in kfreebsd-8 8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze3
has caused the Debian Bug report #677297,
regarding kfreebsd-8: cve-2012-0217
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt
2012/7/21 Yves-Alexis Perez :
> On sam., 2012-07-14 at 11:59 +, r...@debian.org via RT wrote:
>> https://rt.debian.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3892 >
>>
>> 2012/7/12 Steven Chamberlain via RT :
>> > Robert, would you be able to upload this for me please?
>>
>> I'm on it.
>>
> Any news?
There wa
On sam., 2012-07-14 at 11:59 +, r...@debian.org via RT wrote:
> https://rt.debian.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3892 >
>
> 2012/7/12 Steven Chamberlain via RT :
> > Robert, would you be able to upload this for me please?
>
> I'm on it.
>
Any news?
--
Yves-Alexis
signature.asc
Description: Th
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> found 631889 freebsd-buildutils/8.2-2
Bug #631889 {Done: Robert Millan } [freebsd-buildutils]
kfreebsd-8: FTBFS on linux-i386: can't find kernel headers
Bug #631892 {Done: Robert Millan } [freebsd-buildutils]
kfreebsd-9: FTBFS on li
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> # no longer 'pending' as the fix is now in wheezy/sid
> tags 644718 - pending
Bug #644718 [kfreebsd-8] kfreebsd-8: /proc/net/dev gives empty statistics
Removed tag(s) pending.
> # presumably still affects stable
> found 6447
found 631889 freebsd-buildutils/8.2-2
fixed 631889 freebsd-buildutils/8.2-1
thanks
If this is a regression introduced in 8.2-2, it is not an issue for
stable as is (was) stated on the new dashboard:
http://udd.debian.org/dmd.cgi?email=debian-bsd%40lists.debian.org
Regards,
--
Steven Chamberlain
upload?
Robert, would you be able to upload this for me please?
The approved debdiff corresponds with r4341 from
svn.debian.org/glibc-bsd/branches/squeeze/kfreebsd-8
Thanks,
Regards,
--
Steven Chamberlain
ste...@pyro.eu.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with
On sam., 2012-07-07 at 13:02 +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> On jeu., 2012-07-05 at 13:13 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> > On 05/07/12 07:00, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > > Can you show us a debdiff for the package you intend to upload to
> > > stable-security?
> >
> > Hi, Please find debdi
On jeu., 2012-07-05 at 13:13 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> On 05/07/12 07:00, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > Can you show us a debdiff for the package you intend to upload to
> > stable-security?
>
> Hi, Please find debdiff attached.
Sorry for the delay. Please go ahead and upload, I'll try t
his situation, I don't think it's so important as to consider it RC.
I agree...
And FWIW I recently found it extremely useful that there was a
kfreebsd-8 kernel option in the installer.
I saw that kfreebsd-9 would crash as a Xen domU while booting but
kfreebsd-8 was unaffected. That a
On 05/07/12 07:00, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> Can you show us a debdiff for the package you intend to upload to
> stable-security?
Hi, Please find debdiff attached.
Thank you!
Regards,
--
Steven Chamberlain
ste...@pyro.eu.org
diff -u kfreebsd-8-8.1+dfsg/debian/changelog
kfreebsd-8-8.
On mer., 2012-07-04 at 21:33 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Hi Security Team,
>
> Someone replied on RT ticket #3892 (on which I am Cc'd, but can't view
> it and don't know the author) the following:
>
> > Careful, patch in SVN repository can't be used as-is. See:
> > http://lists.debian.org/
Hi Security Team,
Someone replied on RT ticket #3892 (on which I am Cc'd, but can't view
it and don't know the author) the following:
> Careful, patch in SVN repository can't be used as-is. See:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2012/06/msg00214.html
But that is not true. By then I had alrea
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 677297 + security pending
Bug #677297 [kfreebsd-8] kfreebsd-8: cve-2012-0217
Added tag(s) security and pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
677297: http://bugs.debian.org/c
2012/6/21 Steven Chamberlain :
> I'm assuming you created that RT ticket? I was included on Cc:, but I
> can't view via the web without an account.
Yes. I included you on CC. The web interface is at
http://rt.debian.org, but I'm not sure if I'm allowed to give access
to others (maybe ask DSA?).
Hi Robert,
I'm assuming you created that RT ticket? I was included on Cc:, but I
can't view via the web without an account. I also didn't see the
initial post and don't know the status of this.
I tried to follow up just now to a comment (I can't see the author) that
was posted and I've no idea
Hi,
Now that upstream have fixed the sysret patch for RELENG_8_1, I've
committed this as r4320 and we should be ready now for an upload to
stable-sec.
Regards,
--
Steven Chamberlain
ste...@pyro.eu.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscri
md64/trap.c?revision=236953&view=markup#l965
The response from upstream so far is that the commit they made to
RELENG_8_1 was indeed wrong. They haven't fixed it yet, but I think it
will end up something like what I've committed in r4319:
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/glibc-bsd/
On 16/06/12 18:24, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Author: stevenc-guest
> Date: 2012-06-16 17:24:56 + (Sat, 16 Jun 2012)
> New Revision: 4316
>
> Added:
> branches/squeeze/kfreebsd-8/debian/patches/SA-12_04.sysret.patch
> Modified:
>branches/squeeze/kfr
Package: src:kfreebsd-8
Version: 8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze2
Severity: important
Tags: patch squeeze
User: debian-bsd@lists.debian.org
Usertags: kfreebsd
Hi,
Errata notice FreeBSD-EN-12:02.ipv6refcount affects the kfreebsd-8
package in squeeze.
http://security.freebsd.org/advisories/FreeBSD-EN-12:02
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> fixed 677297 kfreebsd-8/8.3-4
Bug #677297 [kfreebsd-8] kfreebsd-8: cve-2012-0217
Marked as fixed in versions kfreebsd-8/8.3-4.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
677297: http://bugs.debian.o
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reopen 677297
Bug #677297 {Done: Robert Millan } [kfreebsd-8] kfreebsd-8:
cve-2012-0217
'reopen' may be inappropriate when a bug has been closed with a version;
all fixed versions will be cleared, and you may need to re-add them.
Bu
Your message dated Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:13:13 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#677297: fixed in kfreebsd-8 8.3-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #677297,
regarding kfreebsd-8: cve-2012-0217
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is
package: kfreebsd-8
version: 8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze2
severity: grave
tag: security
A security advisory for freebsd has been issued, cve-2012-0217. All
of the debian kfreebsd packages are affected. Please see:
http://security.freebsd.org/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-12:04.sysret.asc
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 658617 kfreebsd-8
Bug #658617 [kfreebsd-image-8.3-0-amd64] compatibility with CAM in 9.0 userland
Warning: Unknown package 'kfreebsd-image-8.3-0-amd64'
Bug reassigned from package 'kfreebsd-image-8.3-0-amd64' to
On 23/04/12 21:14, Robert Millan wrote:
> The hurd-i386 buildd isn't keeping up, so 8.2-11 hurd-i386 builds
> haven't been replaced with 8.3-1.
>
> This prevents automated removal of kfreebsd-source-8.2 from unstable,
> which I believe is what is currently preventing migration of 8.3-1 to
> testin
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
The hurd-i386 buildd isn't keeping up, so 8.2-11 hurd-i386 builds
haven't been replaced with 8.3-1.
This prevents automated removal of kfreebsd-source-8.2 from unstable,
which I believe is what is currently preventing migration of 8.3-1 to
testing.
--
Your message dated Sat, 21 Jan 2012 01:04:20 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#654738: fixed in kfreebsd-8 8.3~svn230343-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #654738,
regarding kfreebsd-8: non-standard gcc/g++ used for build (gcc-4.4)
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
Your message dated Sun, 15 Jan 2012 22:17:50 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#655281: fixed in kfreebsd-defaults 8+1
has caused the Debian Bug report #655281,
regarding kfreebsd-8: please provide unversioned kfreebsd-image packages
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 07:24:31PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> El 10 de gener de 2012 0:21, Vagrant Cascadian ha escrit:
> > would each depend on the current kfreebsd-image-X-* packages, where X was
> > the
> > current preferred/default version in a given release.
>
> That's a very subjective
El 10 de gener de 2012 0:21, Vagrant Cascadian ha escrit:
> would each depend on the current kfreebsd-image-X-* packages, where X was the
> current preferred/default version in a given release.
That's a very subjective question. We provide 8.x and 9.x kernels,
like upstream does. Both are suppor
Source: kfreebsd-8
Severity: wishlist
please consider providing unversioned meta-packages for kfreebsd-image and
related packages, much like the linux-latest package is handled. for example:
kfreebsd-image-486, kfreebsd-image-amd64, kfreebsd-image-686,
kfreebsd-image-xen, etc.
would each
Package: kfreebsd-8
Version: 8.2-15
Severity: important
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-4.4
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default version of gcc/g++, or
with gcc-4.6/g++-4.6
1 - 100 of 199 matches
Mail list logo
