On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sonntag, 13. Juli 2014, Thorsten Alteholz wrote:
>> Hmm, according to your announce this upload fixes CVE-2014-4699 which has
>> DSA-2972-1.
>> Or DSA-2949-1 for CVE-2014-3145.
>
> so let's roll a dice? IMO there is no problem / muc
Hi,
On Sonntag, 13. Juli 2014, Thorsten Alteholz wrote:
> Hmm, according to your announce this upload fixes CVE-2014-4699 which has
> DSA-2972-1.
> Or DSA-2949-1 for CVE-2014-3145.
so let's roll a dice? IMO there is no problem / much overhead in keeping a
track of some IDs and there are some iss
On Sun, 13 Jul 2014, Holger Levsen wrote:
As all (most?) LTS updates have a corresponding DSA number why not simply
replace DSA by LTS?
the linux-2.6 is my first counter example, I'm sure there will be more.
Hmm, according to your announce this upload fixes CVE-2014-4699 which has
DSA-2972
Hi,
On Sonntag, 13. Juli 2014, Thorsten Alteholz wrote:
> > Why not simply LTS-0008 (or whatever number this one is)?
> How do you sync two people working on different packages?
I'd suggest to pre-allocate them via a file in git.
> As all (most?) LTS updates have a corresponding DSA number why
Hi,
this is my debdiff for CVE-2014-0191 in libxml2.
I used the patch for wheezy as template.
Thorsten
diff -u libxml2-2.7.8.dfsg/parser.c libxml2-2.7.8.dfsg/parser.c
--- libxml2-2.7.8.dfsg/parser.c
+++ libxml2-2.7.8.dfsg/parser.c
@@ -2554,6 +2554,23 @@
xmlChar start[4];
On Sat, 12 Jul 2014, Michael Gilbert wrote:
Why not simply LTS-0008 (or whatever number this one is)?
How do you sync two people working on different packages?
As all (most?) LTS updates have a corresponding DSA number why not simply
replace DSA by LTS?
Thorsten
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema
Hi,
On Samstag, 12. Juli 2014, Holger Levsen wrote:
> I've refrained from adding "LTS6A-2014-015" to the subject of the linux-2.6
> announcement, as well as from including it in the body. But I think we
> should have some ID there, and I propose to use "Long Term Support for
> Debian 6 Announcemen
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 12:08:23PM +0200, Jan Wagner wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Am 12.07.14 21:27, schrieb Holger Levsen:
> > I've refrained from adding "LTS6A-2014-015" to the subject of the
> > linux-2.6 announcement, as well as from including it in the body.
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 12.07.14 21:27, schrieb Holger Levsen:
> I've refrained from adding "LTS6A-2014-015" to the subject of the
> linux-2.6 announcement, as well as from including it in the body.
> But I think we should have some ID there, and I propose to use
> "Long T
