Hey Armin, [Re: [oe] Update Samba] On 16.04.25 (Mon 07:38) akuster808 wrote:
> Joe, > > > On 04/25/2016 07:01 AM, Joe MacDonald wrote: > > [Re: [oe] Update Samba] On 16.04.22 (Fri 11:30) George McCollister wrote: > > > >> I'm looking forward to seeing these changes in krogoth as what is in > >> there now is unusable from a security standpoint. I cherry picked the > >> patches to krogoth and my builds suceeded but haven't gotten around to > >> doing any operational testing yet. > > > > Agreed. > > > > Armin: I've already done one merge directly to krogoth to resolve a > > build breakage, > > I just finished a a build myself and am seeing this warnings. Are these > covered by your changes? I can send patches if not. > > WARNING: samba-4.4.2-r0 do_package_qa: QA Issue: samba rdepends on > libaio, but it isn't a build dependency, missing libaio in DEPENDS or > PACKAGECONFIG? [build-deps] > WARNING: samba-4.4.2-r0 do_package_qa: QA Issue: samba rdepends on > lttng-ust, but it isn't a build dependency, missing lttng-ust in DEPENDS > or PACKAGECONFIG? [build-deps] No, neither of these are covered in my changes. I hadn't seen either of these, even with my autobuilder. libaio is kind of a pain because in the previous versions of samba there was a configure option to enable/disable it, but that's gone in any version post 4.1, AFAICT. I hadn't seen anything related to lttng in any version. Please send patches and I'll merge them to both places and the samba update to krogoth. Thanks. -J. > > but since you're maintaining the branch I didn't want to > > do any additional ones (even though we started talking about samba > > specifically in the krogoth context) without an explicit go-ahead from > > you. > > > > Do you want me to send you a patch set, a pull request or do you want me > > to merge the samba changes directly? > > Go ahead and merged directly. > > - Armin > > > -J. > > > >> > >> -George > >> > >> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Joe MacDonald <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> I'm still doing some testing on this and I haven't built for all the > >>> architectures yet, but it passed at least the most basic smoke-test. > >>> Given the > >>> number of outstanding CVEs against our current version of Samba (thanks > >>> Armin! > >>> :-)) I think it's best fo rus to update this rather than trying to do any > >>> back-ports, but that also introduces a not-inconsiderable level of risk > >>> for > >>> Samba users. So please, if you're one of them, kick the tires on this as > >>> soon > >>> as you can (or ping me back letting me know what your thoughts are on > >>> this, at > >>> least). > >>> > >>> Thanks all. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> -Joe MacDonald. > >>> :wq > >>> > >>> -- > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Openembedded-devel mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel -- -Joe MacDonald. :wq
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
