Control: severity -1 critical
Hi Michael,
On Wed, 06 Feb 2019 14:33:34 +0100 Johannes Schauer wrote:
> Quoting Michael Stone (2019-02-06 14:22:10)
> > On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 10:47:12AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote:
> > >On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 12:07:37 +0100 Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > >> Jus a
Hi Michael,
Quoting Michael Stone (2019-02-06 14:22:10)
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 10:47:12AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote:
> >On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 12:07:37 +0100 Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> >> Jus a friendly nudge: It would be great if this bug was fixed in time for
> >> Buster.
> >>
> >> Do you
On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 10:47:12AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 12:07:37 +0100 Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Jus a friendly nudge: It would be great if this bug was fixed in time for
Buster.
Do you think you can find the time to have a look at the patches
provided by Josch?
Hi Michael,
On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 12:07:37 +0100 Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Jus a friendly nudge: It would be great if this bug was fixed in time for
> Buster.
>
> Do you think you can find the time to have a look at the patches
> provided by Josch?
>
> Do you need some help?
another week
Dear Michael
Jus a friendly nudge: It would be great if this bug was fixed in time
for Buster.
Do you think you can find the time to have a look at the patches
provided by Josch?
Do you need some help?
Kind regards,
- Jonas
--
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.:
Hi,
another two weeks passed. Would it not make sense to apply the patch now, so
that it gets tested as much as it can before the soft freeze happens in a few
weeks?
Thanks!
cheers, josch
signature.asc
Description: signature
Hello again,
Quoting Johannes Schauer (2018-12-31 10:58:18)
> I'm sorry, but my attached patch was apparently not properly tested by me. :(
>
> More work is needed to backport the patch from upstream to version 8.30
> because
> just calling renameat2 as proposed in the patch I attached in my
Hi,
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 09:18:36 +0100 Johannes Schauer wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 12:56:55 -0500 Michael Stone wrote:
> > Please just wait
> I take that means that you intend to apply the fix I proposed?
>
> The problem now became more dire for fakechroot because mv(1) is now used in
> the
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 12:56:55 -0500 Michael Stone wrote:
> Please just wait
I take that means that you intend to apply the fix I proposed?
The problem now became more dire for fakechroot because mv(1) is now used in
the maintainer script of dash (during the diversion process). So as of a few
On December 23, 2018 12:51:41 PM EST, Johannes Schauer wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Tue, 04 Dec 2018 21:15:35 +0100 Johannes 'josch' Schauer
> wrote:
>> recently (2018-11-29), glibc 2.28 was accepted in unstable. It adds a
>wrapper
>> for the renameat2 syscall. That wrapper is necessary for fakechroot
Hi,
On Tue, 04 Dec 2018 21:15:35 +0100 Johannes 'josch' Schauer
wrote:
> recently (2018-11-29), glibc 2.28 was accepted in unstable. It adds a wrapper
> for the renameat2 syscall. That wrapper is necessary for fakechroot because
> fakechroot cannot intercept system calls but uses a preloaded
Package: coreutils
Version: 8.30-1
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
Control: block #909612 by -1
Hi,
recently (2018-11-29), glibc 2.28 was accepted in unstable. It adds a
wrapper for the renameat2 syscall. That wrapper is necessary for
fakechroot because fakechroot cannot intercept system calls but
12 matches
Mail list logo
