René Mayrhofer wrote:
I agree with going for the backports option so as not to delay the freeze
period any more than necessary.
Thus closing.
However, the typical issue with openswan
will remain in this case: security updates will be more difficult to
Hi Harald and Jonathan,
I agree with going for the backports option so as not to delay the
freeze period any more than necessary. However, the typical issue with
openswan will remain in this case: security updates will be more
difficult to backport to the version currently in wheezy (just
Hi Harald,
Hi Jonathan
Harald Jenny wrote:
I have retitled the bug request to
unblock: openswan/1:2.6.38-1
The version is now in unstable and awaits your (hopefully positive)
decision.
debdiff attached for reference. diffstat:
598 files changed, 11061 insertions(+),
Dear Adam,
I have retitled the bug request to
unblock: openswan/1:2.6.38-1
The version is now in unstable and awaits your (hopefully positive)
decision.
Kind regards
Harald
P.S: If you have any questions please direct them to me as I'm in direct
contact with the upstream development team.
On Thu, 2012-08-02 at 20:26 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Thu, 2012-08-02 at 20:54 +0200, René Mayrhofer wrote:
Please unblock package openswan because it fixes interoperability with
the increasingly important mobile devices (Android and iOS) under
NAT-Traversal conditions.
unblock
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package openswan because it fixes interoperability with
the increasingly important mobile devices (Android and iOS) under
NAT-Traversal conditions.
unblock
On Thu, 2012-08-02 at 20:54 +0200, René Mayrhofer wrote:
Please unblock package openswan because it fixes interoperability with
the increasingly important mobile devices (Android and iOS) under
NAT-Traversal conditions.
unblock openswan/1:2.6.38-1~experimental+1
That package appears to be
7 matches
Mail list logo
