** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1297025
Title:
Either the changelog.gz is missing
This seems to be caused by #1895799 which would be a bug in
pkgstripfiles.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1297025
Title:
Either the changelog.gz is
I've created a PPA for Jammy that incorporates the fix mentionned. The
details are available at
https://launchpad.net/~adrien-n/+archive/ubuntu/openssl-jammy-sru .
Could you test it and confirm your issue is solved?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch
I've created a PPA for Jammy that incorporates the fix mentionned. The
details are available at
https://launchpad.net/~adrien-n/+archive/ubuntu/openssl-jammy-sru .
Could you test it and confirm your issue is solved?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch
I've created a PPA for Jammy that incorporates the fix mentionned. The
details are available at
https://launchpad.net/~adrien-n/+archive/ubuntu/openssl-jammy-sru .
Could you test it and confirm your issue is solved?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch
I've created a PPA for Jammy that incorporates the fix mentionned. The
details are available at
https://launchpad.net/~adrien-n/+archive/ubuntu/openssl-jammy-sru .
Could you test it and confirm your issue is solved?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch
** Also affects: openssl (Ubuntu Lunar)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu Lunar)
Status: New => Fix Released
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
Rafael, could you do these tests on Lunar or Mantic too?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2009544
Title:
OpenSSL 3 performance regression
Status in openssl
included in Kinetic.
** Affects: openssl (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Affects: openssl (Ubuntu Jammy)
Importance: Medium
Assignee: Adrien Nader (adrien-n)
Status: In Progress
** Affects: openssl (Ubuntu Lunar)
Importance: Undecided
Hi Lucas,
Sorry, this is part of an SRU with 4 patches but that we've decided to
hold back for a bit (a few days after the current release). I've removed
ubuntu-sponsors from the "main" LP bug (link near the top of the bug
report) but not from the others. I'll do it now and I think maybe it's
Removed ~ubuntu-sponsors for a few days while a few things settle.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2033422
Title:
openssl: backport to jammy "clear method
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
+ [ATTENTION]
+ This SRU contains FOUR changes which are listed in the section below.
+
[Meta]
This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
This ( #2033422 ) is the "central" bug with the global information and
debdiff.
Hi Nathan,
Sorry, I didn't have enough time to comment here before a few days of
vacation.
This one is indeed not in the SRU at the moment. The description edit
itself did not make much sense.
I first discussed this topic with Simon but then also with Steve
Langasek, with others attending the
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[ATTENTION]
This SRU contains THREE changes which are listed in the section below.
[Meta]
- This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
+ This bug is part of a series of three bugs for a single SRU.
This ( #2033422 ) is
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Meta]
- This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
+ This bug is part of a series of three bugs for a single SRU.
The "central" bug with the global information and debdiff is
http://pad.lv/2033422
[Impact]
S/MIME
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Meta]
- This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
+ This bug is part of a series of three bugs for a single SRU.
The "central" bug with the global information and debdiff is
http://pad.lv/2033422
[Impact]
Decryption
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Meta]
- This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
+ This bug is part of a series of three bugs for a single SRU.
The "central" bug with the global information and debdiff is
http://pad.lv/2033422
[Impact]
Openssl
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[ATTENTION]
- This SRU contains FOUR changes which are listed in the section below.
+ This SRU contains THREE changes which are listed in the section below.
[Meta]
This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
This (
I don't know why LP expired this bug since you commented after I changed
the its status...
Anyway, I'm going to mark it as New again. Unfortunately, I haven't had
time to try to reproduce this again and I won't have time before at
least two weeks due to some time off and Canonical events. It
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[ATTENTION]
This SRU contains FOUR changes which are listed in the section below.
[Meta]
This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
This ( #2033422 ) is the "central" bug with the global information and
debdiff.
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[ATTENTION]
This SRU contains FOUR changes which are listed in the section below.
[Meta]
This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
This ( #2033422 ) is the "central" bug with the global information and
debdiff.
Forgot to upload the latest debdiff.
** Patch added: "openssl_3.0.2-0ubuntu1.12-to-3.0.2-0ubuntu1.13.diff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/jammy/+source/openssl/+bug/2033422/+attachment/5713594/+files/openssl_3.0.2-0ubuntu1.12-to-3.0.2-0ubuntu1.13.diff
--
You received this bug
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[ATTENTION]
This SRU contains FOUR changes which are listed in the section below.
[Meta]
This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
This ( #2033422 ) is the "central" bug with the global information and
debdiff.
Thanks a lot for taking the time to test and provide feedback. I'll
continue with the SRU process; landing will probably take a few weeks.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
Thanks a lot for taking the time to test and provide feedback.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1994165
Title:
CMS_final: do not ignore CMS_dataFinal result
Thanks a lot for taking the time to test and provide feedback.
I'll continue with the SRU process which should take a few more weeks
(I'd say between two and four but that's a very rough guess).
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages,
Should dhcp really be oneshot? I don't know what dhclient was doing (I
guess it was dhclient before) but it sounds difficult to synchronize
this properly. I imagine it's also possible to run the dhcp client in
oneshot mode in a loop with maybe 3 iterations and "sleep 1" in between.
--
You
** Description changed:
+ === SRU information ===
+
+ [Impact]
+ Openssl using an engine dumps core upon certificate creation; other
operations are probably affected too. Overall, engines are likely mostly
unusable.
+
+ [Test plan]
+ An engine is needed to test the fix and I don't think we
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Impact]
S/MIME signature can fail silently
The commit by upstream propagates the return code of some functions rather
than ignore it.
[Test plan]
This issue is not very simple to reproduce because "openssl cms" cannot be
used to
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Impact]
S/MIME signature can fail silently
The commit by upstream propagates the return code of some functions rather
than ignore it.
[Test plan]
This issue is not very simple to reproduce because "openssl cms" cannot be
used to
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Impact]
Severely degraded performance for concurrent operations compared to openssl
1.1. The performance is so degraded that some workloads fail due to timeouts or
insufficient resources (noone magically has 5 times more machines). As a
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Impact]
Openssl using an engine dumps core upon certificate creation; other
operations are probably affected too. Overall, engines are likely mostly
unusable.
[Test plan]
An engine is needed to test the fix and I don't think we
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Impact]
Decryption for Blowfish with OFB and CFB modes fails due to using a key
shorter than expected by default.
Encryption will also use a key shorter than expected.
Exchange of encrypted data from/to Jammy using BF OFB/CFB will
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Impact]
S/MIME signature can fail silently
The commit by upstream propagates the return code of some functions rather
than ignore it.
[Test plan]
- This issue is not very simple to reproduce because "penssl cms" cannot be
used to
** Description changed:
+ === SRU information ===
+
+ [Impact]
+ Severely degraded performance for concurrent operations compared to openssl
1.1. The performance is so degraded that some workloads fail due to timeouts or
insufficient resources (noone magically has 5 times more machines). As a
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
+ [Meta]
+ This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
+ The "central" bug with the global information and debdiff is #2033422
[Impact]
Decryption for Blowfish with OFB and CFB modes fails due to using a key
shorter than
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
+ [Meta]
+ This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
+ The "central" bug with the global information and debdiff is #2033422
[Impact]
Openssl using an engine dumps core upon certificate creation; other
operations are
Attaching debdiff for openssl from 3.0.2-0ubuntu1.10 to
3.0.2-0ubuntu1.11
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
+ [Meta]
+ This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
+ The "central" bug with the global information and debdiff is #2033422
+
+ This SRU addresses four
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
+ [Meta]
+ This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
+ The "central" bug with the global information and debdiff is #2033422
[Impact]
S/MIME signature can fail silently
The commit by upstream propagates the return code
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Meta]
This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
- The "central" bug with the global information and debdiff is #2033422
+ The "central" bug with the global information and debdiff is
http://pad.lv/2033422
[Impact]
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Meta]
This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
This ( #2033422 ) is the "central" bug with the global information and
debdiff.
This SRU addresses four issues with Jammy's openssl version:
- http://pad.lv/1990216:
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Meta]
This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
This ( #2033422 ) is the "central" bug with the global information and
debdiff.
This SRU addresses four issues with Jammy's openssl version:
- - #1990216: Blowfish
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Meta]
This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
- The "central" bug with the global information and debdiff is #2033422
+ The "central" bug with the global information and debdiff is
http://pad.lv/2033422
[Impact]
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Meta]
This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
- The "central" bug with the global information and debdiff is #2033422
+ The "central" bug with the global information and debdiff is
http://pad.lv/2033422
[Impact]
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Meta]
This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
This ( #2033422 ) is the "central" bug with the global information and
debdiff.
This SRU addresses four issues with Jammy's openssl version:
- #1990216: Blowfish
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Meta]
This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
This ( #2033422 ) is the "central" bug with the global information and
debdiff.
This SRU addresses four issues with Jammy's openssl version:
- http://pad.lv/1990216:
** Description changed:
+ === SRU information ===
+
+ [Impact]
+ S/MIME signature can fail silently
+ The commit by upstream propagates the return code of some functions rather
than ignore it.
+
+ [Test plan]
+ This issue is not very simple to reproduce because "penssl cms" cannot be
used to
** Description changed:
- OpenSSL upstream implemented a fix for their issue #18359 "OpenSSL 3 cannot
decrypt data encrypted with OpenSSL 1.1 with blowfish in OFB or CFB modes"
- https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/18359
+ === SRU information ===
+
+ [Impact]
+ Decryption for Blowfish
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Impact]
Decryption for Blowfish with OFB and CFB modes fails due to using a key
shorter than expected by default.
Encryption will also use a key shorter than expected.
Exchange of encrypted data from/to Jammy using BF OFB/CFB will
** Description changed:
=== SRU information ===
[Meta]
This bug is part of a series of four bugs for a single SRU.
This ( #2033422 ) is the "central" bug with the global information and
debdiff.
This SRU addresses four issues with Jammy's openssl version:
- http://pad.lv/1990216:
Thanks for the precision Marian.
Dimitri, do you know if the "sleep 1" works in practice?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to initramfs-tools in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2037202
Title:
Hi,
I have not been able to reproduce your issue. Since you did not provide
the exact command you've used, I did a different test that relies on the
engine. I did the following (lots of trial and error):
* git clone https://github.com/gost-engine/engine
* mkdir build
* cd build
* cmake
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2039142
Title:
openssl v3.0.2 is not work with dynamic
** Tags removed: foundations-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2023545
Title:
[UBUNTU 22.04] openssl with ibmca engine configured dumps core when
(did my mail answer from yesterday get eaten by launchpad?)
Here's an updated debdiff that:
- renames files using the lp- prefix,
- reworks the changelog to a more typical format:
* what (LP: #)
- ${file}
- adds DEP-3 to the patches
I've pushed an updated build on LP at
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu Jammy)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu Jammy)
Milestone: None => jammy-updates
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Adrien Nader (adrien-n)
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Milestone: None => jammy-updates
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Status: New => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
Hi, AFAIU the crux of the issue is that the behaviour on Ubuntu differs
from upstream and is not programmatically discoverable.
OpenSSL 3.2 (which is not released yet and will most likely not be used
in Ubuntu 24.04) switches to seclevel 2 and also has a different meaning
for it. It's (almost?)
Closing this as won't fix but the proper status would be "will-not-
change-anything-but-it-will-get-fixed-when-upstream-changes-to-the-same-
as-us-but-there-is-no-guarantee-there-wont-be-other-differences-until-
their-version-is-released".
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete
Hi Christian, I'd like to move forward with this ticket and I think that
will mean closing it. But first, have things changed on your side?
Also, like Dimitri I am reluctant to commit there but I don't see things
changing until the next openssl LTS release as I've said in
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1917625
Title:
OpenSSL TLS 1.1 handshake fails
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/357998
Title:
openssh-client (amd64) can't login
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Won't Fix
** Changed in: apache (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
Hi, I've been trying to understand this but I've been unsuccessful so
far.
Does it still happen on Ubuntu 22.04 (and 23.04)? Can you reproduce it
without the engine?
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
I had an actual look at the (scary) postinst: the code you've quoted is
the only live code left (the rest can only be triggered when upgrading
from 18.04).
The good^Wgreat news is that I will delete ".
/usr/share/debconf/confmodule" from the script, and it probably should
have been behind a
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu Jammy)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1990216
Title:
backport fix for "OpenSSL 3
** Also affects: openssl (Ubuntu Lunar)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu Lunar)
Status: New => Fix Released
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu Jammy)
Milestone: None => jammy-updates
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
tus: New => Fix Released
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu Jammy)
Importance: Undecided => High
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu Jammy)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Adrien Nader (adrien-n)
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu Jammy)
Milestone: None => jammy-updates
** Changed in:
Public bug reported:
Patches added in 0.24.1-1ubuntu1 prevent gnutls from building. Upstream
has indicated that an additional change should have been included as
mentioned at
https://github.com/p11-glue/p11-kit/issues/419#issuecomment-1259353294 .
** Affects: p11-kit (Ubuntu)
Importance:
I'm attaching a debdiff that should fix the issue. I built and published
the result in the ppa at
https://launchpad.net/~adrien-n/+archive/ubuntu/lp-1991067 and rebuild
gnutls successfully.
** Patch added: "lp-1991067-fix-gnutls-ftbfs.debdiff"
As I've said elsewhere, if we dedup firmware files through symlinks, we
can save 10MB in initrds. Compression does not help because the
compressors have very small compression windows and cannot see
redundancy in practice (this applies to xz to a lesser extent but even
for xz there is an
Updated debdiff that improves patch series order, changes the version
number to *ubuntu2 and adds DEP3 headers to the patch.
** Patch added: "lp-1991067.diff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/p11-kit/+bug/1991067/+attachment/5620011/+files/lp-1991067.diff
--
You received this bug
Public bug reported:
In 9.1-1ubuntu1 (lunar), a testcase has been renamed from proc-selinux-
segfault.sh to selinux-segfault.sh . This changes debian/tests/upstream
to reflect the change.
** Affects: coreutils (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug
Attached is a debdiff against Ubuntu's 3.0.5-2ubuntu2.
** Patch added: "openssl_3.0.5-2ubuntu2-to-openssl_3.0.7-1ubuntu1.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openssl/+bug/1998942/+attachment/5638958/+files/openssl_3.0.5-2ubuntu2-to-openssl_3.0.7-1ubuntu1.debdiff
--
You
Attached is a debdiff against Debian's 3.0.7-1.
** Patch added: "openssl_3.0.7-1-to-openssl_3.0.7-1ubuntu1.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openssl/+bug/1998942/+attachment/5638959/+files/openssl_3.0.7-1-to-openssl_3.0.7-1ubuntu1.debdiff
--
You received this bug
And PPA for this merge is available at
https://launchpad.net/~adrien-n/+archive/ubuntu/merge-openssl-3.0.7/ .
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1998942
Title:
Attached patch. The crux is:
--- coreutils-9.1/debian/tests/upstream2022-12-08 14:47:43.0 +0100
+++ coreutils-9.1/debian/tests/upstream2023-01-10 14:19:26.0 +0100
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@
ls/m-option.sh \
ls/multihardlink.sh \
ls/no-arg.sh \
-
Updated patch following Simon's feedback: there was a pretty bad mistake
in the debian changelog where I included UNRELEASEd changes from Debian
as a dedicated changelog entry.
I had to create a new PPA because as part of the changelog fix, I
changed the version back to 3.0.7-1ubuntu1 rather than
** Patch added: "openssl_3.0.7-1-to-openssl_3.0.7-1ubuntu1~ppa2.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openssl/+bug/1998942/+attachment/5640640/+files/openssl_3.0.7-1-to-openssl_3.0.7-1ubuntu1~ppa2.debdiff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Updated because Debian now has 3.0.7-2 which includes a patch for a low
severity security issue (CVE-2022-3996).
PPA is still at https://launchpad.net/~adrien-n/+archive/ubuntu/merge-
openssl-3.0.7 .
Attached is the debdiff from 3.0.5-2ubuntu2 to 3.0.7-2ubuntu1 .
** CVE added:
Attached is the debdiff from 3.0.7-2 to 3.0.7-2ubuntu1.
** Patch added: "openssl_3.0.7-2-to-openssl_3.0.7-2ubuntu1.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openssl/+bug/1998942/+attachment/5640127/+files/openssl_3.0.7-2-to-openssl_3.0.7-2ubuntu1.debdiff
--
You received this bug
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu Jammy)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Adrien Nader (adrien-n)
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu Kinetic)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Adrien Nader (adrien-n)
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Adrien Nader (adrien-n)
*
Public bug reported:
Debian has moved to 3.0.7 in unstable. Now is a good time to merge it.
** Affects: openssl (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Assignee: Adrien Nader (adrien-n)
Status: In Progress
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Status: New => In Progress
** Chan
Public bug reported:
Our version of libssl3.postinst compares the installed version to
"1.1.1-1ubuntu2.1~18.04.2" (moreover the test is done twice) which is
unlikely to be what we want nowadays.
The version needs to be updated and since we have been carrying this as
a delta from Debian, it would
Patch available. I've reduced the diff to debian to pretty much two
lines and the postinst script. This was made possible by the use of
SECLEVEL=2 by debian and by upstream fixing the testsuite for that
(mostly by forcing some tests to use SECLEVEL=1).
** Patch added:
We'd need more details about the issue and its actual impact for you
since upstream doesn't consider this a security issue since it only
happens when signing, not when checking signatures (which makes sense).
Without this there is no process for pushing an update to a released
version.
--
You
I put together some notes and work-arounds in order to provide a simpler
reference for people hitting this issue. I didn't test everything below
but nothing should be risky.
# Summary
Grub attempts to read the initrd into a memory location that is too
small.
This issue is caused by a
Jeremy, there are duplicate firmware files. Replacing duplicates with
symlinks is probably the easiest and most efficient way to improve the
situation.
I get the following:
> % jdupes -mrS /lib/firmware
> Scanning: 2830 files, 286 items (in 1 specified)
> 405 duplicate files (in 212 sets),
The terrible thing with compression is how we know of no universal rule.
I'm sure you can even find non-pathological cases where lz4 compresses
better than zpaq (and does so 100 times faster). And that's without
taking I/O into account (or filters).
An important thing to keep in mind here is
The issue with being less verbose is that users will end up with the
same issue when two neighbor machines have different updates. This also
applies to machines belonging to different people as soon as these
people discuss about a but that could be caused or solved by these
updates.
I'd prefer to
** Summary changed:
- Merge Debian unstable's 0.24.1-2
+ Merge Debian unstable's p11-kit 0.24.1-2
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to p11-kit in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2003548
Title:
Merge
This is the debdiff from 0.24.1-2 to 0.24.1-2ubuntu1:
p11-kit-0.24.1-2-to-0.24.1-2ubuntu1.debdiff
This is the debdiff from 0.24.1-1ubuntu2 to 0.24.1-2ubuntu1:
p11-kit-0.24.1-1ubuntu2-to-0.24.1-2ubuntu1.debdiff
** Patch added: "p11-kit-0.24.1-1ubuntu2-to-0.24.1-2ubuntu1.debdiff"
Public bug reported:
This is a merge of Debian unstable's 0.24.1-2 as 0.24.1-2ubuntu1.
A PPA is available at
https://launchpad.net/~adrien-n/+archive/ubuntu/p11-kit-merge-0.24.1-2 .
** Affects: p11-kit (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug
Hi Gil,
Can you explain a bit the actual impact of this bug and/or a scenario to
reproduce. The commit doesn't give us a lot of details and the issue
appears to be possibly quite serious but without diving deep into the
code and possibly writing a reproducer from scratch ourselves, it is
hard to
In addition to what Steve has said, I'm wondering if you can work around
this by using faketime when signing.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2003701
Title:
Hi, if I understand correctly, you're either updating python-
cryptography or installing it in a virtual environment, is that right?
Lunar is going to have python3-openssl 23 and python3-cryptography 38
(actually they're already in the archive).
I don't think we could easily change the versions
No problem. I've marked the bug as Invalid. Thanks for your answer. :)
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Adrien Nader (adrien-n)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2006954
Title:
openssl: me
I'm attaching patches for the merge.
The diff from 3.0.8-1 to 3.0.8-1ubuntu1 is in openssl_3.0.8-1.dsc-to-
openssl_3.0.8-1ubuntu1.dsc.diff .
** Patch added: "openssl_3.0.8-1.dsc-to-openssl_3.0.8-1ubuntu1.dsc.diff"
I'm attaching patches for the merge.
The diff from 3.0.7-1ubuntu1 to 3.0.8-1ubuntu1 is in
openssl_3.0.8-1ubuntu1.dsc-to-openssl_3.0.8-1ubuntu1.dsc.diff .
PPA is at
https://launchpad.net/~adrien-n/+archive/ubuntu/openssl-3.0.8-1-merge-v2
** Patch added:
1 - 100 of 289 matches
Mail list logo
