On 2023-09-10 15:57:13 [+0200], Antonio Radici wrote: Hi Antonio, > On Sun, Sep 10, 2023 at 01:47:30PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > Hi Antonio, > > > > On Sun, Sep 10, 2023 at 01:24:10PM +0200, Antonio Radici wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 10, 2023 at 01:05:31PM +0200, Antonio Radici wrote: > > > > Thanks for raising this, I'm uploading the new packages with the fixes > > > > today. > > > > > > apparently someone else did a NMU with the new version and incorrectly > > > closed > > > the bug. > > > > You mean the NMU by Sebastian? > > Yes
The new version addressed the CVEs so closing the bug isn't incorrect? > > > > > I reopened the bug because stable needs to be addressed (which I will do > > > today > > > as I just wrote) and then it's probably worth investigating how to > > > integrate > > > those NMU into the git repo > > > > Actually you do not need to reopen. A bug can be closed with mutliple > > versions, that is 2.2.12-0.1 closes it, but as well so does then the > > 2.2.9-1+deb12u1 upload and the 2.0.5-4.1+deb11u3 one. > > > > I think that was not the case several years ago, but nowdays BTS can > > handle that, and will reflect it nicely as well in the version graph. > > > > Or were you meaning something different? > > Ah ok good, then I will add the extra versions if they are not there already Right, here is an example for the bug closed in stable, and experimental. https://bugs.debian.org/1034720 Sebastian