On 02/05/2012 05:23 PM, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
On 04/02/12 01:12, Luk Claes wrote:
On 02/03/2012 10:35 PM, Mario Antonio wrote:
Do you think that there will be a fix for Lenny even though
Lenny will be ending his life this weekend ?
It's already there in the archive, the DSA mail
On 02/03/2012 10:35 PM, Mario Antonio wrote:
Do you think that there will be a fix for Lenny even though Lenny
will be ending his life this weekend ?
It's already there in the archive, the DSA mail only still needs to be
sent.
Cheers
Luk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
On Qui, 21 Jan 2010, Thiemo Nagel wrote:
Dear Alexander,
having read your email concerning the termination of etch security
support, I'm looking for an upgrade path for our installation of ~100
machines.
Is it planned to start squeeze security support in time to
Hi
This is just to inform you of a point release of
Lenny: 5.0.2.
In a point release packages in stable will get updated.
Most of these packages will already be in the security archive, though
some of them are fixes for major issues that are not security related or
have less impact from a
Bart Martens wrote:
Hello debian-release team,
debian-volatile team,
debian-security team,
I have updated bug report 457291 flashplugin-nonfree: decision
2007-12-21: keep this package out of stable starting with lenny.
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=457291
I
Hi
This is just to inform you that there will be soon a point release of
Etch: 4.0r8 tomorrow and Lenny: 5.0.1 on Saturday.
In a point release packages in oldstable or stable will get updated.
Most of these packages will already be in the security archive, though
some of them are fixes for major
Hi
Currently the security support for the volatile archive is supposed to
be taken care of by the uploaders of the respective packages.
I think it would make sense to have someone or a team tracking security
issues for volatile.
What do you think? Is anyone up to providing such issue tracking
Matthew Johnson wrote:
Hi guys, I'm looking to come up with a plan for DBus in Lenny. The
relevant bug is #508032.
A quick synopsis of the problem is that until recently DBus was shipped
with a default configuration on the system bus which allowed more
message than was intended. 1.2.10
Filipus Klutiero wrote:
Hi,
I reported #468765 about a questionable statement on www.debian.org. Frank
Lichtenheld wants this to be discussed.
This statement is in a security announcement. Martin Schulze confirmed that
he
wrote the statement. Does the security team think that oldstable
Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
These releases are called 'point releases' and are prepared publicly.
Preperation mails to these point releases are periodicly sent to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Also prior releases had
'Miscellaneous Bugfixes', see eg. [2]. The list of
Touko Korpela wrote:
On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 08:33:16PM +0200, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
On Sun May 20, 2007 at 17:29:19 +0300, Touko Korpela wrote:
Unrar (source package unrar-nonfree) has CVE-2007-0855 (Stack-based buffer
overflow) bug in etch and sarge. It has debian bug #410580
Maintainer
Jim Popovitch wrote:
On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 22:36 +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
On Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 22:10:08 +0100, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
However, I cannot see any security announcement for most of these. Were
they
updated because of the security fix for tar? If yes, why doesn’t
Russ Allbery wrote:
Jim Popovitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Actually I didn't miss that, or rather I did get that email today
but in the past I seem to recall the process was individual DSAs and
releases, followed by a bundled new release rollup. Perhaps I am wrong.
Stable updates
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
no name supplied wrote:
| On May 27, 2004, at 2:15 PM, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
|
| On 5/27/2004, Luk Claes wrote:
|
| You should check the website www.d-o/security/nonvulns-woody
| At least 4 of the 5 you mention are listed there...
|
| Luk -- thank
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
| Hi all,
|
| Can anyone tell me the status of the woody Apache 1 packages with respect
| to the following security advisories:
|
| CAN-2003-0993 CAN-2003-0020 CAN-2003-0987 CAN-2004-0174
|
| (There is also
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rick Moen wrote:
| Quoting Luk Claes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
|
|
|You should check the website www.d-o/security/nonvulns-woody
|
|
| This extremely useful page[1], unless I'm missing something, appears
to NOT
| be linked from either the Security Team page
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
| Hi all,
|
| Can anyone tell me the status of the woody Apache 1 packages with respect
| to the following security advisories:
|
| CAN-2003-0993 CAN-2003-0020 CAN-2003-0987 CAN-2004-0174
|
| (There is also
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rick Moen wrote:
| Quoting Luk Claes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
|
|
|You should check the website www.d-o/security/nonvulns-woody
|
|
| This extremely useful page[1], unless I'm missing something, appears
to NOT
| be linked from either the Security Team
18 matches
Mail list logo
