On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 08:08:11PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 08:38 +0200, Guido Günther wrote:
> > I'm not sure wheter there is active _upstream_ security support for
> > lightning but I guess thats not different from some other packages.
> >
> > One of the reasons to build iceowl-extension from icedove instead of
> > iceowl was to get all the fixes that go into that source tree for free
> > including security ones (which might not be the case for standalone
> > iceowl) and to have in sync versions of those two. So the situation is
> > certainly better than in squeeze. I'm also happy to backport security
> > issues for iceowl-extension (knowledge permitting).
>
> Thanks for the explanation. I'm happy enough with that as long as Moritz
> is.
Yes, sure.
Cheers,
Moritz
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
