On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Matthew Miller wrote:
>> I think what killed it was that lots of people were interested in
>> continuing on Red Hat Linux 7.x and Red Hat Linux 9 indefinitely, but
>> not nearly as many were interested in extended life for the early
>> Fedora
Matthew Miller wrote:
> I think what killed it was that lots of people were interested in
> continuing on Red Hat Linux 7.x and Red Hat Linux 9 indefinitely, but
> not nearly as many were interested in extended life for the early
> Fedora Core releases. *shrug*
That was a problem, but without the
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 03:42:44AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I really wish Fedora would provide the infrastructure to push security
> updates for EOL releases. I still think that the one thing that killed
> Fedora Legacy was its insane amount of bureaucracy and that with an ACL-less
> free-fo
Haïkel wrote:
> /me wearing his FESCO member hat.
>
> Please remember that F21 has reached End of Life and is *not*
> supported by fedoraproject.org
> Though these packages may fix a very critical CVE, we cannot guarantee
> that CVEs in other packages are also fixed.
>
> So no warranties from fp.
Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> Why do you want to build such packages for EOLed distro?
Because I had an immediate need for it myself and decided to share it for
the benefit of others stuck on F21 for whatever reason.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.
On Sex, 2016-02-19 at 15:11 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
> Tomasz Torcz composed on 2016-02-19 20:40 (UTC+0100):
>
> > On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 02:05:18PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> > > Igor Gnatenko composed:
>
> > > > Why do you want to build such packages for EOLed distro?
>
> > > Because he's
On 19/02/16 20:18 +0100, Fabio Alessandro Locati wrote:
From my point of view, the whole concept of "EOL" is: if you use this
version you acknowledge that NO security patch will arrive and therefore
it's possible and very likely that you are running an unsafe system.
I think the important part i
2016-02-19 3:35 GMT+01:00 Kevin Kofler :
> Hi,
>
> I have built an updated glibc package for Fedora 21, with (alleged) fixes
> for the following security issues:
> * CVE-2015-7547 (CRITICAL)
> * CVE-2015-1781
> * CVE-2015-8777
> * glibc PR17269
> * glibc PR18032
> backported from Fedora 22 or forwa
On 02/19/2016 02:40 PM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 02:05:18PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
Igor Gnatenko writes:
Why do you want to build such packages for EOLed distro?
Because he's a nicy guy and it's an important patch?
It's counter productive. It's even dangerous, by int
Tomasz Torcz composed on 2016-02-19 20:40 (UTC+0100):
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 02:05:18PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
>> Igor Gnatenko composed:
>> > Why do you want to build such packages for EOLed distro?
>> Because he's a nicy guy and it's an important patch?
> It's counter productive. It'
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 02:05:18PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> Igor Gnatenko writes:
> > Why do you want to build such packages for EOLed distro?
>
> Because he's a nicy guy and it's an important patch?
It's counter productive. It's even dangerous, by introducing
false sense of safety (apar
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 02:05:18PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Igor Gnatenko writes:
> > Why do you want to build such packages for EOLed distro?
>
> Because he's a nicy guy and it's an important patch?
From my point of view, the whole concept of "EOL" is: if you use this
version you acknowledge
Igor Gnatenko writes:
> Why do you want to build such packages for EOLed distro?
Because he's a nicy guy and it's an important patch?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Why do you want to build such packages for EOLed distro?
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016, 3:36 AM Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have built an updated glibc package for Fedora 21, with (alleged) fixes
> for the following security issues:
> * CVE-2015-7547 (CRITICAL)
> * CVE-2015-1781
> * CVE-2015-8777
> *
Hi,
I have built an updated glibc package for Fedora 21, with (alleged) fixes
for the following security issues:
* CVE-2015-7547 (CRITICAL)
* CVE-2015-1781
* CVE-2015-8777
* glibc PR17269
* glibc PR18032
backported from Fedora 22 or forward-ported from CentOS 7. (To the best of
my knowledge, the
15 matches
Mail list logo
