** Changed in: gupnp (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gupnp in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1799974
Title:
[MIR] gupnp
Status in gupnp package in Ubuntu:
Fix Rele
I reviewed gupnp 1.2.1-1 as checked in to eoan. This isn't a full
security audit, but rather a quick gauge of maintainability.
- gupnp is a gobject based library for implementing and consuming UPnP
services, and is required by Rygel.
- It's part of the GNOME project.
- It's written in C.
- One CV
** Changed in: gupnp (Ubuntu)
Assignee: Ubuntu Security Team (ubuntu-security) => Chris Coulson
(chrisccoulson)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gupnp in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1799974
Title:
[MIR]
This one could do with a quick review from the security team.
** Changed in: gupnp (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Ubuntu Security Team (ubuntu-security)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gupnp in Ubuntu.
https://bu
** Changed in: gupnp (Ubuntu)
Assignee: Didier Roche (didrocks) => (unassigned)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gupnp in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1799974
Title:
[MIR] gupnp
Status in gupnp package i
The only binary we care about is 'libgupnp-1.0-4'.We can promote the
documentation if that's standard practice but that's not needed.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gupnp in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1799974
Thanks! Do you mind listing the exact binary package list which should
then be promoted?
Agreed with you on the autopkgtests. This could have helped if vala were
to regressed the lib build, but unsure this is really needed as a
separate autopkgtests.
So, +1 for me, the security team should feel f
Same as gssdp, the doc/depends issue is fixed in 1.0.3-2 in Debian/going
to be autosynced. The tests are not integration tests so unsure there is
much value having them as autopkgtests?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gupn
* -doc package: I think we should promote it as well in main, if the -dev is
promoted. If so, this dep should be fixed: Depends: lynx | www-browser (first
is lynx, in universe, www-browser is a virtual package not fullfiled?). In
addition, it ships the doc in devhelp format (despite symlink from
** Changed in: gupnp (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Didier Roche (didrocks)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gupnp in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1799974
Title:
[MIR] gupnp
Status in gupnp package i
** Description changed:
* Availability
- Builds on all supported architectures in Ubuntu and on sync from Debian
+ Builds on all supported architectures in Ubuntu and on sync from Debian,
+ the package was in main in the past and needs to be re-promoted
* Rationale
We would like to
11 matches
Mail list logo