Bug#1062765: ITP: mailctl -- IMAP/SMTP clients with the capabilities of renewal and authorization of OAuth2 credentials

2024-02-02 Thread 陳昌倬
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: ChangZhuo Chen (陳昌倬) X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org * Package name: mailctl Version : 0.9.2 Upstream Contact: Peter Dobsan * URL : https://github.com/pdobsan/mailctl * License : BSD-3-Clause Programming Lan

Re: 64-bit time_t transition in progress

2024-02-02 Thread Bill Allombert
On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 10:58:51AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > Well, if this suggestion had come 6 months ago when this plan was laid out > on debian-devel, I think it would have been worth exploring. > > Though I would have still expected a large number of false-positives, > because there woul

Re: 64-bit time_t transition in progress

2024-02-02 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 07:34:46PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 08:21:57AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > Dear developers, > > As mentioned previously on debian-devel[6], we know that there are a number > > of library packages being included in this transition which we

Re: 64-bit time_t transition in progress

2024-02-02 Thread Bill Allombert
On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 08:21:57AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > Dear developers, > > As mentioned previously on debian-devel[6], we know that there are a number > of library packages being included in this transition which we have not > proven have an ABI affected by 64-bit time_t. This is beca

Re: Transparency into private keys of Debian

2024-02-02 Thread Bill Allombert
Le Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 10:38:03AM +0100, Simon Josefsson a écrit : > Hi > > I'm exploring how to defend against an attacker who can create valid > signatures for cryptographic private keys (e.g., PGP) that users need to > trust when using an operating system such as Debian. A signature like > th

Re: 64-bit time_t transition in progress

2024-02-02 Thread Steve Langasek
Sorry, I mean to add: in the specific case of clamav, the source in experimental has a new soname. So the patch will definitely not apply; and we will want to NMU clamav to unstable, with a rename of whatever runtime library package is there at the time the NMUs happen; so the version of clamav in

Re: 64-bit time_t transition in progress

2024-02-02 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 05:27:02PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On February 2, 2024 4:43:52 PM UTC, Steve Langasek wrote: > >Hello, > >debian-devel-announce wouldn't let me attach the file, but for those on > >debian-devel at least, you can find the dd-list of to-be-NMUed source > >packages at

Re: 64-bit time_t transition in progress

2024-02-02 Thread Scott Kitterman
On February 2, 2024 4:43:52 PM UTC, Steve Langasek wrote: >Hello, > >debian-devel-announce wouldn't let me attach the file, but for those on >debian-devel at least, you can find the dd-list of to-be-NMUed source >packages attached. Thanks, How are you handling the case where there's already a

Re: [Debian-iot-maintainers] Bug#1062257: libcoap3: NMU diff for 64-bit time_t transition

2024-02-02 Thread Carsten Schoenert
Am 01.02.24 um 09:30 schrieb Steve Langasek: What is the rationale behind rising a bug report at 9:51pm my time and firing a *direct* NMU upload just 11min later (according to the time stamps from the emails)? There are 1200+ source packages that require NMUing and the Debian archive is a movi