- in the upstream bug tracker,
which means it has been reviewed from the security point of view, and
hasn't been considered as a security issue.
oh well, I've missed that - in the middle of the night. Sorry for the
noise,
Bernd
--
Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux
.
As it was flagged security in the upstream bugtracker, I'm doing the
same here.
A fix in buster would be appreciated.
Thanks a lot,
Bernd
--
Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer
http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: ECA1
Package: libc6
Version: 2.19-11
Severity: serious
please backport the fix for
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17150
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Bernd Zeimetz
Systems Engineer
Debian Developer
conova communications GmbH
Web| http://www.conova.com/
E-Mail | b.zeim
}}}
not_first_call = optimized out
#16 0xbfd7 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
--
Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer
http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95
of libc6 is apache2-common listed as service to check for, which
does not exists anymore - the new name is apache2.2-common.
A patch is attached.
Cheers,
Bernd
--
Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer
http://bzed.dehttp
://www.ubuntu.com/usn/usn-944-1
Cheers,
Bernd
--
Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer
http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprints: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79
ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95
Package: libc6
Version: 2.9-26
Severity: wishlist
As more and more providers start to redirect traffic to port 53 to their own
nameservers for various reasons more and more people run nameservers on
different ports. While it is possible to use iptables and friends to nat
traffic to ports != 53,
7 matches
Mail list logo