On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 09:44:03AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > reopen 496393 > thanks > > Hi, > > Maybe I'm completely missing something, but the patch you added just seems to > make matters much worse. Perhaps I don't understand it, but you remove use of > the safe "mktemp" function and replace it with tempfiles based on PID? It > looks to me like this change just introduced a new tempfile vulnerability. > > And perhaps Dmytri can tell us what the original bug was that he found in his > file, so the real issue can be addressed.
I inadvertently mixed up my two source directories and sent off a build from the wrong directory thus reversing my patch :P > By the way, you are aware that you're using NMU-style versioning for your > package while making maintainer uploads? because I forgot, duh! Thanks for noticing, Thijs. The correct patch is being built as I write. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
