On Wed, 2013-09-18 at 14:06 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
There are several CVE pending for Xen, plus some embargoed ones. This
fixes all publicly ones that have fixes.
Looking back through older requests, I spotted that this one was still
in the queue.
Assuming the changelog for 4.1.4-3+deb7u2
On Wed, October 2, 2013 19:21, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 04:58:43PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
On Mon, September 30, 2013 18:52, Bastian Blank wrote:
I don't think this will work. The current security process ignores
any communitation that is otherwise part of the NMU
Hi Bastian,
Would you say that for publicly disclosed issues, the 'open' approach of
pu works better? Meaning:
1. debdiff gets reviewed on a public list, others have an opportunity
to help review and point out a mistake, and the discussion is archived
2. the proposed updates queue has a
On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 04:58:43PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
On Mon, September 30, 2013 18:52, Bastian Blank wrote:
I don't think this will work. The current security process ignores
any communitation that is otherwise part of the NMU process. As long as
the security team does not
On Mon, September 30, 2013 18:52, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 04:38:24PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
Thanks. I've read them. My conclusion is that there are two problems:
1/ On a previous upload, someone from the security team added extra
changes without coordination or
On Mon, September 23, 2013 10:47, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 09:47:32AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
Do you have a message ID for me? I'd rather try to see what the problems
with the wheezy-security route are and how we can resolve them, rather
than try to work around them
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 04:38:24PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
Thanks. I've read them. My conclusion is that there are two problems:
1/ On a previous upload, someone from the security team added extra
changes without coordination or reporting them back.
2/ It took long to process the upload
On Sun, September 22, 2013 23:34, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 09:58:54PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Wed, 2013-09-18 at 14:06 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
There are several CVE pending for Xen, plus some embargoed ones. This
fixes all publicly ones that have fixes.
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 09:47:32AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
Do you have a message ID for me? I'd rather try to see what the problems
with the wheezy-security route are and how we can resolve them, rather
than try to work around them via pu.
20130512113628.GA16136@elende
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
On Wed, 2013-09-18 at 14:06 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
There are several CVE pending for Xen, plus some embargoed ones. This
fixes all publicly ones that have fixes.
Could we have a debdiff, rather than just the changelog please? Have the
security team confirmed
Processing control commands:
tags -1 + moreinfo
Bug #723641 [release.debian.org] pu: package xen/4.1.4-5
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
723641: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=723641
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 23:34 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 09:58:54PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Wed, 2013-09-18 at 14:06 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
There are several CVE pending for Xen, plus some embargoed ones. This
fixes all publicly ones that have fixes.
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
There are several CVE pending for Xen, plus some embargoed ones. This
fixes all publicly ones that have fixes.
xen (4.1.4-5) UNRELEASED; urgency=high
* Fix reference counting error
13 matches
Mail list logo
