install bind_8.2.2p7-1_alpha.changes
install bind_8.2.2p7-1_arm.changes
install bind_8.2.2p7-1_i386.changes
install bind_8.2.2p7-1_m68k.changes
install bind_8.2.2p7-1_powerpc.changes
install bind_8.2.2p7-1_sparc.changes
install boot-floppies_2.2.18_i386.changes
install cfengine_1.5.3-6.0.1_alpha.ch
I just confirmed to my dismay that pcmcia for the vanilla (default)
kernel for boot-floppies 2.2.18 on i386 is broken. That means we need
to update pcmcia-modules-2.2.18pre21 for i386.
The real snag is that I'm out tonight (flying home) and then flying
off on vacation tomorrow morning. I will b
I just discovered a but in the vanillla kernel/pcmcia set for i386.
Right now the pcmcia modules for the standard kernel are broken.
Figures, that's one of the two I didn't test.
I'm hoping Randolph can rebuild the pcmcia-modules for 2.2.19
boot-floppies i386.
Daniel, thanks a lot for being so r
I've uploaded a whole pile of packages in the past day that, IMO, should go
into r2.
For security:
modutils_2.3.11-13.1_powerpc.changes
modutils_2.3.11-13.1_sparc.changes
modutils_2.3.11-13_powerpc.changes
ncurses_5.0-6.0potato1_sparc.changes
xmcd_2.5pl1-7.1_powerpc.changes
Those cover
I have now tagged boot floppies 2.2.19 (release_2-2-19) in CVS. Here's
the changelog:
boot-floppies (2.2.19) stable; urgency=low
* PowerPC fixes:
- Update kernel version to 2.2.18pre21
- Fix the miBoot command line options not to try to force atyfb
(should fix color issues on som
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ben Collins writes:
>On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 01:28:13AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 10:02:47AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
>> > > Since I'm being held responsible both for the current situation and for
>> > > resolving it, and since no o
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
> > As a CD Vendor I have watched this thread with interest. The day that you
> > release 2.2R2 there could be a major security hole announced that needs
> > fixing. There could be another one the day I get the Cd's back from the
> > replicator !!
>
> But th
Heh, we got lucky :)
Wichert.
- Forwarded message from Andreas Hasenack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Andreas Hasenack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: typo in modutils-2.3.20
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 13:20:32 -0200
It's out.
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/kernel/modutils/v2.3/modut
I just uploaded modutils 2.3.11-13 which is the bug and security fixed
version based on the changes Keith made in 2.3.21.
I can't do the rebuilds and announcements for it until something like 9
hours from now though. Anyone from the security team who wants to is
free to beat me to it though :)
W
Previously Ben Collins wrote:
> - Security updates affecting base packages, Wichert. How long till this
> is done? What packages should we be watching for?
New modutils (current security fix breaks some things in nasty ways),
libncurses (dan), elvis-tiny (uploaded, needs to be rebuild).
> - Res
> As a CD Vendor I have watched this thread with interest. The day that you
> release 2.2R2 there could be a major security hole announced that needs
> fixing. There could be another one the day I get the Cd's back from the
> replicator !!
But there are security issues we know about *now*. I'm not
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 12:35:19AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 08:53:49AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > > So we release immediately even though there are major security updates and
> > > package revisions that need to be done? T
On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 01:28:13AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 10:02:47AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > So do we want to change that to "wait for 2.2r3" just after releasing
> > 2.2r2? IMO, if the securty fixes don't get it, there is no way we can
> > recommend CD vendors
On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 10:02:47AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> So do we want to change that to "wait for 2.2r3" just after releasing
> 2.2r2? IMO, if the securty fixes don't get it, there is no way we can
> recommend CD vendors using 2.2r2.
2.2r2 will have security problems when released. Hopefull
On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 12:35:19AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 08:53:49AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > So we release immediately even though there are major security updates and
> > package revisions that need to be done? That sounds like RH release goals,
> > "make the p
On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 08:53:49AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> So we release immediately even though there are major security updates and
> package revisions that need to be done? That sounds like RH release goals,
> "make the point change, just so it looks like we are doing something".
I repeat:
On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 09:01:59PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Some further notes, starting at the end:
>
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 11:54:03PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > This looks like everything. I think we can probably get this completed in
> > less than two weeks (giving extra time becaus
On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 11:39:29AM +0100, Christian Meder wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 11:54:03PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > - Update packages. This is in a per arch basis, and only if absolutely
> > essential (this applies to out-of-date packages only). You can update as
> > needed, but
On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 12:48:34PM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > [m68k] no 2.2.18 yet, maybe we will have a new set of 2.2.10 kernels, but
> >they should be tested a little by our users. We might build 2.2.16 or
> >17 kernels, but I think there is not enough time to test this.
>
> [m68k] no 2.2.18 yet, maybe we will have a new set of 2.2.10 kernels, but
>they should be tested a little by our users. We might build 2.2.16 or
>17 kernels, but I think there is not enough time to test this.
2.2.16 is known to not boot on a variety of Macs, please stick with 2.2
Some further notes, starting at the end:
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 11:54:03PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> This looks like everything. I think we can probably get this completed in
> less than two weeks (giving extra time because of US holiday).
As announced (see the previous reference to debian-ann
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 11:54:03PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> - Update packages. This is in a per arch basis, and only if absolutely
> essential (this applies to out-of-date packages only). You can update as
> needed, but we wont hold back release for non-essential updates, it will
> just ha
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 11:54:03PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> Here's the current status of 2.2r2 release plans, in order of expected
> completion, along with those responsible:
>
> - Kernel 2.2.18-pre21 builds (ports who want it). Let me know who wants
> this, and when you can get it done. If y
Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> - Kernel 2.2.18-pre21 builds (ports who want it). Let me know who wants
> this, and when you can get it done. If you do not tell me that your port
> needs 2.2.18-pre21 kernel images, then we wont be waiting for it to be
> uploaded. Give me a time fra
24 matches
Mail list logo
