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