Hi, > So this is a different bug. > > I've unmerged and reopened #568008 which refers to padlock_sha. Thanks! I already wondered why some bugs referred to aes and some for sha, but assumed they were the same as they were merged.
So the sha problem remains. Does "this is safe to ignore" apply to this issue as well? Kind regards, Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201107301324.01067.ralfjun...@gmx.de
