On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 21:27 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
With regard to the packages that depend on ImageMagick that you already
updated: will you revert those commits in git
I'm unsure I known how doing that correctly.
Does it enough do just:
git revert 56e05f..HEAD
or I must do
07.06.2012 12:52, Tadej Janež написал:
On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 21:27 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
With regard to the packages that depend on ImageMagick that you already
updated: will you revert those commits in git
I'm unsure I known how doing that correctly.
Does it enough do just:
git revert
06.06.2012 03:09, Tadej Janež написал:
On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 13:55 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
I'll plan unpush that update and work on patching ImageMagick to handle
these issues locally. But I'm not security expert and can't guarantee
something except mentioned patch apply (contrary leave it
04.06.2012 21:11, Pete Walter написал:
Pavel Alexeevforumat hubbitus.com.ru writes:
May be in next time? What disadvantages you are seen proceed with that
update? Do you try test it?
No, I did not test this. And here's a few reasons why I think this
shouldn't be pushed:
- You are forcing
04.06.2012 22:26, Michael Schwendt написал:
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 19:36:29 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
Additionally have worth I try read carefully all docs about
provenpackager and such updates and have not found how deal with such
versions.
It's not provenpackager specific stuff, but found in
On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 13:55:21 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
Only one other think before I do that. Is it will be needed then
introduce epoch in Fedora 16 IM build to push less version in stable
branch?
Could you explain _why_ you think you need to increase the Epoch?
Last package in F-16
On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 14:05:13 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
04.06.2012 22:26, Michael Schwendt написал:
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 19:36:29 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
Additionally have worth I try read carefully all docs about
provenpackager and such updates and have not found how deal with such
05.06.2012 16:09, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 14:05:13 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
04.06.2012 22:26, Michael Schwendt написал:
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 19:36:29 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
Additionally have worth I try read carefully all docs about
provenpackager and such updates
On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 13:55 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
I'll plan unpush that update and work on patching ImageMagick to handle
these issues locally. But I'm not security expert and can't guarantee
something except mentioned patch apply (contrary leave it on upstream
authors, as I was want
28.05.2012 16:45, Tomáš Smetana wrote:
On Sun, 27 May 2012 23:28:03 +0400
Pavel Alexeevfo...@hubbitus.com.ru wrote:
Hi.
Due to the security issues ([1] for example) and act as newcomer
provenpackager I'll plan update ImageMagick in Fedora 16 too (I should
had been done it early off course
Tadej Janež wrote:
Pavel,
On Tue, 2012-05-29 at 20:21 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
It is main reason why I request provenpackager rights. In fedora 17 it
was so painful because I several times asks build dependencies and
then ask help to push updates too.
I think in that turn now I can do
03.06.2012 22:57, Tadej Janež wrote:
Pavel,
On Tue, 2012-05-29 at 20:21 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
It is main reason why I request provenpackager rights. In fedora 17 it
was so painful because I several times asks build dependencies and
then ask help to push updates too.
I think in that turn
Pavel Alexeev forum at hubbitus.com.ru writes:
If you or other will insist I may unpush that update and try patch
IM for all issues off course... But I really do not want doing it
now.
In my opinion, the right way to handle this is to backport the security fixes.
You even have patches linked
04.06.2012 20:10, Pete Walter wrote:
Pavel Alexeevforumat hubbitus.com.ru writes:
If you or other will insist I may unpush that update and try patch
IM for all issues off course... But I really do not want doing it
now.
In my opinion, the right way to handle this is to backport the security
Pavel Alexeev forum at hubbitus.com.ru writes:
May be in next time? What disadvantages you are seen proceed with that
update? Do you try test it?
No, I did not test this. And here's a few reasons why I think this
shouldn't be pushed:
- You are forcing others to do work they otherwise
Pete Walter wrote:
Pavel Alexeev forum at hubbitus.com.ru writes:
May be in next time? What disadvantages you are seen proceed with that
update? Do you try test it?
No, I did not test this. And here's a few reasons why I think this
shouldn't be pushed:
- You are forcing others to do
On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 20:57:01 +0200, Tadej Janež wrote:
For techne (one of the dependent packages which I maintain) you bumped
the release from 0.2.3-2 to 0.2.3-3, which breaks upgrades to F-17 and
rawhide.
Is there a way to revert the change and make a 0.2.3-2.fc16.1 build?
Revert the change
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 19:36:29 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
Additionally have worth I try read carefully all docs about
provenpackager and such updates and have not found how deal with such
versions.
It's not provenpackager specific stuff, but found in the basic packaging
guidelines:
Pavel,
On Tue, 2012-05-29 at 20:21 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
It is main reason why I request provenpackager rights. In fedora 17 it
was so painful because I several times asks build dependencies and
then ask help to push updates too.
I think in that turn now I can do all that myself, so it
28.05.2012 16:23, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 05/27/2012 10:28 PM, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
Hi.
Due to the security issues ([1] for example) and act as newcomer
provenpackager I'll plan update ImageMagick in Fedora 16 too (I should
had been done it early off course). It seams addressed in rawhide.
Hi
On 05/27/2012 10:28 PM, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
Hi.
Due to the security issues ([1] for example) and act as newcomer
provenpackager I'll plan update ImageMagick in Fedora 16 too (I should
had been done it early off course). It seams addressed in rawhide.
Hi Pavel,
I'm not sure it's a good
On Sun, 27 May 2012 23:28:03 +0400
Pavel Alexeev fo...@hubbitus.com.ru wrote:
Hi.
Due to the security issues ([1] for example) and act as newcomer
provenpackager I'll plan update ImageMagick in Fedora 16 too (I should
had been done it early off course). It seams addressed in rawhide
22 matches
Mail list logo
