On Thursday 22 May 2014 13:33:26 Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
[...]
> ffmpeg
> -> I think we need to end official support. Raphael's backport with
> limited scope can be released as a best-effort package, but even for
> non-obscure codecs like MPEG4 the 0.5-based version lacks far too many
> things to
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 02:01:45AM +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> I would rather invest my efforts in upgrading my Asterisk deployment.
>
> Hopefully for wheezy LTS we could support it, since the version on
> wheezy matches the one that upstream has picked as LTS.
Ack, that sounds lik
On 19/05/14 15:51, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 02:02:30PM +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
>> On 16/05/14 07:12, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
>>> Based on my experience with security support in oldstable and/or feedback
>>> received from upstream or maintainers so far I
Mathieu Parent (Debian) wrote...
> As this package doesn't have Vcs-* fields, I wonder where is its
> source code versionned?
On my disk, modulo the recent changes by Moritz. And yes, that's not
the best place now that package has left the larval state. Give me a
day or two to find the documentat
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 01:33:26PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> qemu-kvm / libvirt / xen
> -> unless there's a dedicated volunteer, I'll mark it as unsupported
> soonm
>
>
> icedove
> -> Guido, what are the plans? Maybe reconsider for wheezy-lts?
> Alternatively we could also limit the supp
On Thu, 22 May 2014, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> On jeu., 2014-05-22 at 13:33 +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > asterisk / wordpress
> > -> These was discussed but no real final status yet? Anyone stepping
> > forward?
>
> I think I can volunteer for wordpress provided Raphaël is interested
> to
2014-05-22 13:33 GMT+02:00 Moritz Muehlenhoff :
[...]
>> I've uploaded a first release of debian-security-support to squeeze-lts
[...]
Hi Moritz,
As this package doesn't have Vcs-* fields, I wonder where is its
source code versionned?
Regards
--
Mathieu Parent
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to de
On jeu., 2014-05-22 at 13:33 +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> asterisk / wordpress
> -> These was discussed but no real final status yet? Anyone stepping
> forward?
I think I can volunteer for wordpress provided Raphaël is interested
too…
Regards,
--
Yves-Alexis
signature.asc
Description: Th
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 12:22:07PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 07:12:10AM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > Hi,
> > a range of packages will not be supportable in squeeze-lts. But since we
> > have now have the debian-security-support package we can transparently
>
On 19. mai 2014, at 15:27, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 08:52:04AM +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
>> On 16. mai 2014, at 22:07, Matt Palmer wrote:
>>>
>>> On the other hand, I do like the idea of providing alternate kernels,
>>> although I wonder if the regular backported
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 05:39:05PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 10:14:32AM +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
> > WordPress as of 2.9 has few-click updates from wp-admin.
> > WordPress as of 3.7 has automated updates of security releases.
> >
> > So, for updates at least,
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 10:35:01AM +0200, Guido Günther wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 10:04:03AM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > On ven., 2014-05-16 at 07:12 +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> >
> > > These are already end-of-lifed in oldstable:
> > > chromium-browser
> > > iceweasel (it w
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 02:02:30PM +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> On 16/05/14 07:12, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > Based on my experience with security support in oldstable and/or feedback
> > received from upstream or maintainers so far I would like to propose
> > to exempt the follo
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 09:30:40PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 09:43:20AM +0200, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> > On Friday 16 May 2014 17:39:02 Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > [...]
> > > What could be done is to provide the wheezy kernel with the source package
> > > name
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 08:52:04AM +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
> On 16. mai 2014, at 22:07, Matt Palmer wrote:
> >
> > On the other hand, I do like the idea of providing alternate kernels,
> > although I wonder if the regular backported kernel isn't enough for people?
>
> No, they're not, beca
Le samedi 17 mai 2014 à 10:44 +0200, Christoph Biedl a écrit :
> Agreed. You get a 2010 Linux, it might run on 2015-ish hardware but
> don't hold your breath.
When you have a 2010 application (and I mean a 1995 application last
rebuilt in 2010) and the only thing you can buy is 2015 hardware, you
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 08:52:04AM +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
> On 16. mai 2014, at 22:07, Matt Palmer wrote:
> > On the other hand, I do like the idea of providing alternate kernels,
> > although I wonder if the regular backported kernel isn't enough for people?
>
> No, they're not, because t
On 16. mai 2014, at 22:07, Matt Palmer wrote:
>
> On the other hand, I do like the idea of providing alternate kernels,
> although I wonder if the regular backported kernel isn't enough for people?
No, they're not, because there isn't security support as we understand it in
the stable branch.
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 09:43:20AM +0200, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> On Friday 16 May 2014 17:39:02 Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> [...]
> > What could be done is to provide the wheezy kernel with the source package
> > name linux-3.2. This way it would benefit from all the security backports
> > done
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 10:44:39AM +0200, Christoph Biedl wrote:
> Matt Palmer wrote...
>
> > My
> > use-case for LTS, at the very least, is more about keeping existing machines
> > running and secure, rather than continuing to deploy squeeze machines onto
> > new generations of hardware.
>
> Agr
Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote...
> I'm interested in having Asterisk supported.
Well, I volunteered to do asterisk tests as requested in the original
"Bits from the security team" message. So once my setup is up and
running, I could extend it to squeeze.
> Could you elaborate on what are the
Matt Palmer wrote...
> My
> use-case for LTS, at the very least, is more about keeping existing machines
> running and secure, rather than continuing to deploy squeeze machines onto
> new generations of hardware.
Agreed. You get a 2010 Linux, it might run on 2015-ish hardware but
don't hold your
On Friday 16 May 2014 17:39:02 Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
[...]
> What could be done is to provide the wheezy kernel with the source package
> name linux-3.2. This way it would benefit from all the security backports
> done for wheezy-security.
I assume you meant just 'linux' here? There's no need
23 matches
Mail list logo
