FR web forum wrote:
Some specific scripts to modified. Easy to hack.
If I can help, give me an SSH access.
I have access to the server but I have no idea where the signature
string is checked. I can surely debug it and find it out, but if you are
available I can send you in private a copy of
On 30/07/2016 Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Andrea Pescetti
So I can supply a full source package or I can give my +1 to a "patch"
package that others prepare. ...
[orcmid] I can provide the patch source package on Monday.
Since I can only work on it today, I've up
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2016 05:54
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Officially releasing a patch for CVE-2016-1513
>
> On 30/07/2016 Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> >> -Original Message-
> >> F
Carl,
I deleted the 0.1.4 Release extensions from
< https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/devtools/>.
- Dennis
> -Original Message-
> From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 09:27
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] R
Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
I would like to remove those three.
Sure, feel free to. As I wrote, they were meant as backup solutions in
case we had issues with the patch-only package.
I have reviewed apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1.zip ...
I think this is good enough to go with.
Perfect, then
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2016 11:09
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Officially releasing a patch for CVE-2016-1513
>
> Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> > I would like to remove those three.
>
> Sure, f
On 07/30/2016 01:37 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
Carl,
I deleted the 0.1.4 Release extensions from
< https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/devtools/>.
- Dennis
Thanks Dennis,
I thought I'd get back to this later after the momentum picks back up.
Although that seems to be gett
Hello, all --
I've been reviewing the replacement libraries submitted by Carl, Damjan,
Pat, and Ariel for valid sigs. All look good.. We now have duplicate fixed
libraries for Linux-32, and Linux-64 based on submissions from Carl,
Damjan, and Ariel. I'd be happy to move these somewhere in the next
The problem is definitely in r1409590, in the LinkTarget.mk patch.
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 2:12 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
> I've narrowed this Windows build performance regression down to the
> original branches/gbuild commits 1409589 and 1409590, which go together and
> can't be split up.
>
>
