Control: tags -1 confirmed moreinfo
On 2015-02-12 05:32, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Here is a new debdiff. (tested in its original upstream version
> in v0.36) Maybe it would've been easier to squash the two patches,
> but this way it's easier to tell whether the patches match what is
> upstream.
>
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 confirmed moreinfo
Bug #777649 [release.debian.org] cgmanager security update for jessie
Added tag(s) confirmed.
--
777649: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=777649
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
T
Here is a new debdiff. (tested in its original upstream version
in v0.36) Maybe it would've been easier to squash the two patches,
but this way it's easier to tell whether the patches match what is
upstream.
diff -Nru cgmanager-0.33/debian/changelog cgmanager-0.33/debian/changelog
--- cgmanager
Quoting Niels Thykier (ni...@thykier.net):
> Ok, are we guaranteed that pcgpath ends with the path separator? Consider:
No in fact I think we're guaranteed it won't.
> "/foo/bar"
> "/foo/bar2/somewhere-else"
>
> Unless the path separator is included in the end (i.e. it always uses
> "/foo/b
On 2015-02-11 19:57, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Niels Thykier (ni...@thykier.net):
>> Control: tags -1 moreinfo
>>
>> On 2015-02-11 05:36, Serge Hallyn wrote:
>>> Package: release.debian.org
>>> Usertags: jessie-pu
>>>
>>> A security issue was found in cgmanager, allowing root-owned privileged
>
Hi,
DSA is concerned about the current state of our buildd's readyness for jessie.
The Debian buildd network uses a fork of the buildd and sbuild packages instead
of the packages we ship in the archive. The reasons why we are still doing
that are not entirely clear, but that's the status quo.
T
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 11:06:20 +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I fixed #777564 yesterday, a bug in quota that prevents it from working
> with IPV6 NFS servers. Since there was a difference in a "compatible"
> structure definition the bug *may* have a security implication. Now I
> wonder
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
X-debbugs-cc: k...@debian.org
Please unblock package xorg-server. New upstream stable release with a
few bugfixes including a CVE and a regression from the last batch of
CVEs. Nothing udeb
Quoting Niels Thykier (ni...@thykier.net):
> Control: tags -1 moreinfo
>
> On 2015-02-11 05:36, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > Usertags: jessie-pu
> >
> > A security issue was found in cgmanager, allowing root-owned privileged
> > containers to fully administer cgroups on
I can help, but I'm not a dev or maintainer.
I've posted in devel mailing list that I'm available for help, and got a
reply from Jay that I'd need to find a sponser...
Anyone interested in taking over as maintainer-> I'm more than happy to
give a helping hand.
I am not going to be able to handle the ICU transition and am looking
for a new maintainer for ICU (an RFA is open). Whoever takes over ICU
will have to manage the transition to whatever version of ICU is current
at the time, and it will have to be handled after jessie is released.
--
To UNSUBSC
Hi guys,
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17512 is still growing,
and porting all the patches to 2.24.90.20141023-1 is getting less and less
trivial. If you short the distance with the upstream version, that will put a
lot of work of the security-team off :)
Thanks for your w
On 9 February 2015 at 09:36, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> I'm afraid we cannot accept 0.21.3-1.1 in Jessie because the changes are
> quite large. Can you please prepare an upload targetting jessie based on
> 0.21.1-2.1?
>
Thanks for looking at this. I have created a patch that backport the
relevant c
Le Tue, 10 Feb 2015 23:05:01 +0100,
Julien Cristau a écrit :
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 00:21:53 +0100, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
[...]
> >
> > What would be the opinion of the RT about this change?
> >
> We (or at least I) prefer to see proposed changes in the mail to
> having to look them up.
+ * Switch versioned Breaks for trigger cycles from << to <= relations (with
+the necessary version adjustments).
Your changelog and commit message describe the change in the wrong direction,
the patch shows it the other way:
- auctex (<= 11.87-3),
+ auctex (<< 11.87-3+deb8u1),
Andreas
-
Hi,
I fixed #777564 yesterday, a bug in quota that prevents it from working
with IPV6 NFS servers. Since there was a difference in a "compatible"
structure definition the bug *may* have a security implication. Now I
wonder if it makes sense and is still possible to migrate the latest
version of qu
2015-02-10 23:15 GMT+01:00 Mehdi Dogguy :
> Le 2015-02-09 08:25, Mathieu Parent (Debian) a écrit :
>>
>>
>> you can now:
>> unblock ctdb/2.5.4+debian0-4
>>
>
> Done.
>
> Thanks for your work!
Thanks Medhi
--
Mathieu Parent
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
wit
17 matches
Mail list logo
