Re: WebKitGTK+ security status

2016-01-06 Thread Tomas Popela
On Mon, 2015-12-28 at 14:24 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > This mail is in regards to WSA-2015-0002: http://webkitgtk.org/securi > ty > /WSA-2015-0002.html > > In short, we have by my count: > > * Zero CVEs affecting the webkitgtk4 package in F23 > * 40 CVEs affecting the webkitgtk4 package

Re: WebKitGTK+ security status

2016-01-06 Thread Tomas Popela
Hi, On Sat, 2016-01-02 at 16:16 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > Looking over the list, most of the impacted software we could live > without, or stands a good chance of being ported in time. Evolution is > mostly ported upstream, as is Midori. Evolution's WebKit 2 port is targeted to be

Re: WebKitGTK+ security status

2016-01-02 Thread Michael Catanzaro
On Sat, 2016-01-02 at 14:31 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > A deadline might help motivate some upstream projects to move to > webkitgtk4 I suppose. I'm not sure we can say the f25 branch point, > because we don't really yet know what that date exactly is. ;(  > > Perhaps we pick some date after the

Re: WebKitGTK+ security status

2016-01-02 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 14:24:29 -0600 Michael Catanzaro wrote: > Hi, > > This mail is in regards to > WSA-2015-0002: http://webkitgtk.org/security /WSA-2015-0002.html > > In short, we have by my count: > > * Zero CVEs affecting the webkitgtk4 package in F23 > * 40 CVEs

WebKitGTK+ security status

2015-12-28 Thread Michael Catanzaro
Hi, This mail is in regards to WSA-2015-0002: http://webkitgtk.org/security /WSA-2015-0002.html In short, we have by my count: * Zero CVEs affecting the webkitgtk4 package in F23 * 40 CVEs affecting the webkitgtk4 package in F22 * 129 CVEs affecting the webkitgtk and webkitgtk3 packages in