Carsten, The dependency of RPM on libsmack has been backed out of T:T. While we re-evaluate the MeeGo Security Requirements, we will not be introducing any additional MSSF features into T:T. If any of the MSSF packages or patches show aberrant behavior, we'll remove that package or patch for the time being.
If you have any concerns around this, please let me know. Ryan On 3/11/11 2:49 PM, "Tracy Graydon" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi Carsten, > >I'll defer to Ryan on this. I declined these SRs based on his input this >morning. He indicated that there are ongoing discussions regarding >architecture. Given the issues we've seen with the libsmack stuff, I am >accepting/declining based on Ryan's guidance. > >I am sure that if you and Ryan are in agreement on specific changes, there >would be no issue with acceptance. Ryan will give me the nod when it is >good >to go for T:T acceptance. So, I'd recommend pinging him, and resubmitting >accordingly. With his nod, I can happily accept the changes. > >Ryan, if I missed something, please let me know. I am always on the >look-out >for i586 build issues, but we don't look at ARM at that closely, since >most >ARM-related stuff isn't in our (my) bailiwick. It is possible I overlooked >something. > >Tracy > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [email protected] >[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Carsten Munk >Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 1:19 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [meego-packaging] [meego-commits] 14678 declined: >devel:security/libsmack to Trunk:Testing/libsmack > >Hi, > >(Not part of security team) > >Will a patch to solve the current Trunk ARM build failure for libsmack >be accepted? > >rpm as a base package depends on libsmack, so it's quite critical in >the bootstrap of the armv8el/hardfp port that we get these compiled >into proper OBS fashion. > >BR >Carsten Munk > >2011/3/11 Tracy Graydon <[email protected]>: >> Hi Shaik Parvez, >> The following change has been rejected. >> >> Reason: >> We are not accepting security changes to T:T right now while the >security architecture is still under discussion. >> >> Please fix the issues above and resubmit. >> >> Thanks, >> MeeGo Release Engineering Team >> >> [This message was auto-generated] >> --- >> >> Request #14678: >> >> submit: devel:security/libsmack(r5)(update) -> Trunk:Testing/libsmack >> >> >> Message: >> # - Remove crappy getline() reading and replace with fgets reading in >smack_rule_set_new() >> # - Implemented smack_have_access() function. >> # - Fix: update mtime for global_rules. >> # - BID#13247 >> # - Needed for FEA#9093 >> >> State: declined 2011-03-11T13:10:50 tracyg >> Comment: We are not accepting security changes to T:T right now while >>the >security architecture is still under discussion. >> >> >> History: new 2011-03-10T10:14:57 sparvez >> >> _______________________________________________ >> MeeGo-commits mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-commits >> >_______________________________________________ >MeeGo-packaging mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging > >_______________________________________________ >MeeGo-packaging mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging _______________________________________________ MeeGo-packaging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging
