Hello Christian,
Am Mon, 21 May 2007 18:19:55 +0200
schrieb Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> --4652b713_4b2230d6_17ed
>
> gpg: Signatur am Mo 21 Mai 2007 18:19:55 CEST mit DSA Schlüssel, ID
> C0143D2D, erfolgt
> gpg: Falsche Unterschrift von "Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
>
>
notfound 424629 samba_3.0.24-6etch2
found 424629 samba_3.0.25-1
thanks
Quoting Kai Henningsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Package: samba
> Version: 3.0.24-6etch1
> Severity: important
>
> (Versions below from after I downgraded Samba: 3.0.24-6 works fine.)
>
> Symptoms: on a share with "force group"
> > gpg: Signatur am Do 17 Mai 2007 11:10:17 CEST mit DSA Schlüssel, ID
> > C0143D2D, erfolgt
> > gpg: Falsche Unterschrift von "Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
Well, you're probably missing the Debian keyring on your
machine. 0xC0143D2D is definitely in it.
Anyway...
> > I'm afraid I
Hello Christian,
Am Thu, 17 May 2007 11:10:17 +0200
schrieb Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> gpg: Signatur am Do 17 Mai 2007 11:10:17 CEST mit DSA Schlüssel, ID
> C0143D2D, erfolgt
> gpg: Falsche Unterschrift von "Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
Hmm.
> I'm afraid I don't really
Christian Perrier wrote:
> > The samba team just sent me the attached patch which supposedly fixes
> > #424629 for 3.0.24-6etch1 (in short, it fixes that RC bug in etch's
> > samba).
> So, in short, we should update the version in etch with this patch.
I'm currently building an updated package an
> The samba team just sent me the attached patch which supposedly fixes
> #424629 for 3.0.24-6etch1 (in short, it fixes that RC bug in etch's
> samba).
OK, I succeeded building a test case.
On an etch samba server running 3.0.24-6etch1, as this to smb.conf:
[test]
comment = Test
path=/va
> I haven't looked very closely at what's going on, but I bet the problem
> is related to the fix for CVE-2007-2444, which changes the way in which
> samba gets root access when it needs it. It switches from
> become_root_uid_only() to become_root(). The names of those functions
> suggest that pr
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 06:23:38PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Hmmm, OK, that's enough. There are now enough such issues raised to
> prevent us to allow 3.0.25-1 to migrate to testing too quickly, until
> all this is examined.
>
> As a consequence, I raise the severity of this bug report to
Quoting Kai Henningsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Package: samba
> Version: 3.0.24-6etch1
> Severity: important
>
> (Versions below from after I downgraded Samba: 3.0.24-6 works fine.)
>
> Symptoms: on a share with "force group" set, users no longer have access
> according to their usual groups; as n
severity 424629 serious
thanks
Quoting Kai Henningsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Package: samba
> Version: 3.0.24-6etch1
> Severity: important
>
> (Versions below from after I downgraded Samba: 3.0.24-6 works fine.)
Hmmm, OK, that's enough. There are now enough such issues raised to
prevent us to a
Package: samba
Version: 3.0.24-6etch1
Severity: important
(Versions below from after I downgraded Samba: 3.0.24-6 works fine.)
Symptoms: on a share with "force group" set, users no longer have access
according to their usual groups; as newly created files (correctly) have
the forced group, presum
11 matches
Mail list logo
