Re: Accepted graphicsmagick 1.3.16-1.1+deb7u10 (source amd64 all) into oldoldstable

On 2017-10-31 15:45:31, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Tue, 31 Oct 2017, Antoine Beaupré wrote: >> I'll take care of it then. Should I just reuse the old DLA id? or >> simply mention the old DLA id in the announcement? Or mention all the >> CVEs fixed in the old DLA in the new DLA? >> >> Not

Re: Accepted graphicsmagick 1.3.16-1.1+deb7u10 (source amd64 all) into oldoldstable

On Tue, 31 Oct 2017, Antoine Beaupré wrote: > I'll take care of it then. Should I just reuse the old DLA id? or > simply mention the old DLA id in the announcement? Or mention all the > CVEs fixed in the old DLA in the new DLA? > > Not actually sure how to merge this. :) You prepare your DLA

Re: Accepted graphicsmagick 1.3.16-1.1+deb7u10 (source amd64 all) into oldoldstable

On 2017-10-31 14:13:13, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Tue, 31 Oct 2017, Antoine Beaupré wrote: >> > Please send it again and add a small sentence explaining that you send an >> > old advisory that never made it to the list... IOW if you expect >> > confusion, add an explanation to clear it up. >>

Re: Accepted graphicsmagick 1.3.16-1.1+deb7u10 (source amd64 all) into oldoldstable

On Tue, 31 Oct 2017, Antoine Beaupré wrote: > > Please send it again and add a small sentence explaining that you send an > > old advisory that never made it to the list... IOW if you expect > > confusion, add an explanation to clear it up. > > I will be looking at a GM update later today -

Re: Accepted graphicsmagick 1.3.16-1.1+deb7u10 (source amd64 all) into oldoldstable

On 2017-10-31 11:56:31, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, 28 Oct 2017, Brian May wrote: >> I didn't realize until after I uploaded the newer version associated >> with DLA-1140-1. So I tried sending DLA-1130-1 again, followed by >> DLA-1140-1. >> >> Unfortunately DLA-1140-1 made it to the

Re: Accepted graphicsmagick 1.3.16-1.1+deb7u10 (source amd64 all) into oldoldstable

Hi, On Sat, 28 Oct 2017, Brian May wrote: > I didn't realize until after I uploaded the newer version associated > with DLA-1140-1. So I tried sending DLA-1130-1 again, followed by > DLA-1140-1. > > Unfortunately DLA-1140-1 made it to the list, but DLA-1130-1 still > didn't. I am concerned if I

Re: Accepted graphicsmagick 1.3.16-1.1+deb7u10 (source amd64 all) into oldoldstable

Antoine Beaupré writes: > Somehow the DLA-1130-1 that was associated with this upload never made > it to the mailing list archive here: Yes, I commented on that in a recent email. I didn't realize until after I uploaded the newer version associated with DLA-1140-1. So

Re: Accepted graphicsmagick 1.3.16-1.1+deb7u10 (source amd64 all) into oldoldstable

On 2017-10-27 19:05:07, Hugo Lefeuvre wrote: > Hi Antoine, Brian, > >> Somehow the DLA-1130-1 that was associated with this upload never made >> it to the mailing list archive here: >> >> https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2017/10/ >> >> I also didn't receive a copy, so I suspect it

Re: Accepted graphicsmagick 1.3.16-1.1+deb7u10 (source amd64 all) into oldoldstable

Hi Antoine, Brian, > Somehow the DLA-1130-1 that was associated with this upload never made > it to the mailing list archive here: > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2017/10/ > > I also didn't receive a copy, so I suspect it was never sent. > > A. > > PS: I realized this while

Re: Accepted graphicsmagick 1.3.16-1.1+deb7u10 (source amd64 all) into oldoldstable

Somehow the DLA-1130-1 that was associated with this upload never made it to the mailing list archive here: https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2017/10/ I also didn't receive a copy, so I suspect it was never sent. A. PS: I realized this while reviewing my own announcements - it seems