Re: [SECURITY] [DSA 3148-1] chromium-browser end of life

2015-02-02 Thread Pavlos K. Ponos 

Thank you very much Paul for the reply.
Kind regards,
Pavlos

*Pavlos K. Ponos*
View Pavlos K. Ponos's profile on LinkedIn 


On 02/02/2015 09:45 PM, Paul van der Vlis wrote:

Op 02-02-15 om 20:13 schreef Pavlos K. Ponos:

Hello list!

Thank you very much for the detailed feedback :)
One last question with regards to the following quote, till the next
stable release would we have security issues with Iceweasel and Icedove
too?(!)

I don't know, I expect it will be no problem till the next stable release.

But what I saw in the past, Iceweasel and Icedove did not have one year
security support after a new stable release. After a few months the
support was gone.

For many people it will not be a problem to do the upgrade fast, but I
am system administrator of complex installations with many desktop
clients. I like to have some time for the upgrade.

With regards,
Paul van der Vlis.

Re: [SECURITY] [DSA 3148-1] chromium-browser end of life

2015-02-02 Thread Paul van der Vlis 
Op 02-02-15 om 20:13 schreef Pavlos K. Ponos:
> Hello list!
> 
> Thank you very much for the detailed feedback :)
> One last question with regards to the following quote, till the next
> stable release would we have security issues with Iceweasel and Icedove
> too?(!)

I don't know, I expect it will be no problem till the next stable release.

But what I saw in the past, Iceweasel and Icedove did not have one year
security support after a new stable release. After a few months the
support was gone.

For many people it will not be a problem to do the upgrade fast, but I
am system administrator of complex installations with many desktop
clients. I like to have some time for the upgrade.

With regards,
Paul van der Vlis.



-- 
Paul van der Vlis Linux systeembeheer, Groningen
http://www.vandervlis.nl/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/maok4h$36b$1...@ger.gmane.org

Re: [SECURITY] [DSA 3148-1] chromium-browser end of life

2015-02-02 Thread Pavlos K. Ponos 

Hello list!

Thank you very much for the detailed feedback :)
One last question with regards to the following quote, till the next 
stable release would we have security issues with Iceweasel and Icedove 
too?(!)


Regards,
Pavlos

On 02/02/2015 06:46 
PM, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
And there will be more packages with this problem, e.g. Iceweasel and 
Icedove. With regards, Paul van der Vlis. 


*Pavlos K. Ponos*
View Pavlos K. Ponos's profile on LinkedIn

Re: [SECURITY] [DSA 3148-1] chromium-browser end of life

2015-02-02 Thread Sebastian Rose 

> Or use the the (non-free) Chrome DEBs provided by Google.

Did they stop to put their servers into /etc/apt/sources.list  before
installing and, even worse, after de-installing?  They did the last time
I (un-)installed Chrome.

  - Sebastian

-- 

Ich setzte einen Fuß in die Luft, und sie trug.
 (Hilde Domin)


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87y4og8721@gmx.de

Re: [SECURITY] [DSA 3148-1] chromium-browser end of life

2015-02-02 Thread Moritz Mühlenhoff 
Paul Wise  schrieb:
>> So, what are the alternatives in our case?
>
> Upgrade to jessie or switch to another web browser.

Or use the the (non-free) Chrome DEBs provided by Google.

Cheers,
Moritz


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/slrnmcvgcu.4hr@inutil.org

Re: [SECURITY] [DSA 3148-1] chromium-browser end of life

2015-02-02 Thread Paul van der Vlis 
Op 02-02-15 om 04:44 schreef Michael Gilbert:
> On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
>> On Sun, 1 Feb 2015 11:18:43 PM Paul Wise wrote:
>>> chromium was already being backported to wheezy for security updates,
>>> the latest versions need newer compilers so we can't backport any
>>> more.
>>
>> Why can't we backport the compilers too?
> 
> As mentioned already it was discussed [0], and the release team seemed
> willing to consider the idea.  I simply didn't have the time or
> motivation myself to do it.
> 
> If there were someone willing to maintain it, and work through the
> process, it could thus theoretically be done.

I think it's a good idea to do a backport of the build-system after
freeze-time of testing. Then we know what the new build-environment is
for the coming release.

I can understand that Michael does not have the time and motivation for
such a backport, Chromium will take much time. But maybe others have.

And there will be more packages with this problem, e.g. Iceweasel and
Icedove.

With regards,
Paul van der Vlis.


-- 
Paul van der Vlis Linux systeembeheer, Groningen
http://www.vandervlis.nl/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/mao9l9$cur$1...@ger.gmane.org