According to this: http://lwn.net/Articles/367443/, latest kernel
updates have security fixes (the second one appears on the 2.6.31.9
list).
Is this something that has been backported to current F-12 kernels (I
don't see it in changelog), or do we need a security update for F-12
here?
--
Bojan
On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 19:16 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
There is a 2.6.31.9 build in Koji.
Yeah, I've seen it. But, it's not in updates. Hence the question.
--
Bojan
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 22:21 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
I didn't see any of the recent previous spec file comments indicate
back ported security fixes. So its unlikely the latest security fixes
are in any earlier version. If you want them now, grab the kernel from
koji. Otherise you can wait
On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 23:41 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
Should they all get a potentially broken kernel? The risk of known
vulnerabilities that are purported to be fixed, needs to balanced
against the risk that there are regressions in the kernel.
This is what Fedora kernel developers do,
Rudolf Kastl che666 at gmail.com writes:
intel (i965) works fine...
You are lucky. Major regressions there in F-12. On my hardware, this used to
work when nomodeset was passed to kernel. Now, it doesn't any more. With KMS, on
the other hand, hibernate/thaw or suspend/resume causes the whole
Rahul Sundaram sundaram at fedoraproject.org writes:
If you have a problem with this, do explain why. Not suggesting it is
not a problem but being more descriptive does help.
This opens the door to all kinds of cascaded exploits that would otherwise not
be possible (see:
On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 14:31 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
.. err Jeff Garzik already made that point in this thread.
Yeah, so what? Am I not allowed to agree? Or not allowed to point to
another site?
--
Bojan
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 15:19 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
IMO, it is not particularly useful in a already long thread to keep
repeating the same points.
Please stop patronising. It's annoying.
--
Bojan
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 15:49 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Repeating the same thing over and over again is annoying as well. It's
just noise instead of useful input.
Look, a person expressed an opinion about this screw up on LWN that I
find very reasonable. So, I sent my agreement with it to the
Jeff Spaleta jspaleta at gmail.com writes:
Referencing a link to Jeff Garzik's LWN post
where he reiterates what he has already said in this mailinglist
discussion doesn't add anything.
As I already explained, it adds my voice. You may not like that. That's OK
with me.
--
Bojan
--
Dave Airlie airlied at redhat.com writes:
So cool off.
So, do guys get a course in patronising at RH or do you come up with this stuff
all on your own? ;-)
Nobody's upset. I added my voice. You guys don't like it. Get over it.
--
Bojan
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 02:41 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Well done. Good way to indulge in what you accuse other people of.
Thanks. Did you enjoy it? Joke, joke!
Jeff's point was already made by him.
Yeah, no kidding.
An echo serves no purpose.
200 comments to that bug say otherwise.
--
On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 03:00 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
I would have thought, it should have actually convinced you to not
indulge in same thing but apparently not. I will lower my expectations.
You don't seem to realise that right now you have a protest staged
outside your office. Your
Rahul Sundaram sundaram at fedoraproject.org writes:
Nah. I am saying, atleast put up different signs rather than everyone
hold up the same signs and make the protest so boring
Lucky it's a virtual protest only. Otherwise, it wouldn't be so boring, now
would it, no matter what the signs read?
Adam Williamson awilliam at redhat.com writes:
What would you suggest would be better
than escalating the issue at the first available opportunity to the
appropriate authority - FESco - which is exactly what's happened?
RH folks in charge of this package (or packages) should tell everyone
Dave Airlie airlied at redhat.com writes:
What has this got to do with Red Hat? you seem to be seriously concerned
that people with Red Hat email addresses haven't just fixed this
problem.
It just so happens that people not willing to change this immediately and people
telling others to shut
On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 10:01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Upstream change or not, you're pissing off users to save 59k out of
however many gigabytes a minimal GNOME install is. I shouldn't really
presume to speak for others, but for me focus-follows-mouse is wired
into the fingertips --- it's not a
What happened to that? It's been built in Koji but it's not Rawhide or
updates...
--
Bojan
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
New mesa (7.6.0) is causing trouble for people using F-11/12 code (see
bugs #524338 and #509528 for instance).
Are there fixes available for these problems? Last time 7.6.0 packages
were built was Sept 21, which is a month and a half ago and it seems
that concerns from the above bugs are not
Peter Robinson pbrobinson at gmail.com writes:
I thought dist-f12-updates-candidate were packages that had been build
for F-12 but had not yet been tagged. It doesn't necessarily mean they
are going to be pushed into F-12.
True, but there is no way to say right now which one would those be.
On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 16:18 -0400, Warren Togami wrote:
5) How many untagged packages are there?
koji list-tagged --latest dist-f12-updates-candidate
I ran this today (just for kicks). It gives back 323 packages. Even with
false positives, it a large amount for zero day updates.
This is just
Adam Williamson awilliam at redhat.com writes:
I just did a mock rebuild of the latest 2.6.31 kernel for f11. seems to
work fine for my purposes (was testing if my psb kernel module build for
2.6.31 was okay). so you can do it that way if you really need it.
No, I don't need it. I just
Now that .1 is out, is there anything in particular stopping F-11 from
having this kernel?
--
Bojan
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Bojan Smojver bojan at rexursive.com writes:
Maybe I missed something, but it seems that some updates that have been
submitted for F-11 testing are still pending. Any ideas why that is?
I meant to say, submitted over a week ago.
--
Bojan
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list
Rahul Sundaram sundaram at fedoraproject.org writes:
They are probably waiting on rel-eng to sign the packages. If you can be
more specific, it would be easier to tell you what the status is.
viewvc-1.1.1.
Also, it would be good if various apr-util packages (from F-9 to F-11 could be
pushed
On Sun, 2006-03-12 at 09:12 +1100, Bojan Smojver wrote:
Stopping tasks: =
Kernel 2054 is the same, so I was wrong about that mouse patch. Probably
some other module...
--
Bojan
Just for the record, the recent kernels (2032 and above it would seem),
hang occasionally on resume on my notebook (this is after suspend to
disk with the vanilla kernel code). The last output is:
Stopping tasks: =
I'm attaching the lspci output for hardware reference. Full specs of the
notebook
27 matches
Mail list logo
