Hi, * Michael S. Gilbert <[email protected]> [2009-08-10 21:14]: > On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:58:17 +0000, Nico Golde wrote: [...] > > CVE-2009-2414 [libxml2 stack recursion] > > RESERVED > > - libxml2 <unfixed> (medium; bug #540865) > > - [etch] - libxml <unfixed> > > + [lenny] - libxml <removed> > > i still don't think this is what you're trying to get at. you want to > mark it is removed from unstable, which will automatically also mark > it removed from lenny.
No, why should it remove it as removed from lenny as well in this case? > then you want to do something special for etch, and i think your intent > is a no-dsa? Not sure yet. > or if you don't want to do that, you can not add an etch > entry, and it will be tracked as affected. So my current intention is to mark lenny as not containing libxml and since thsi will be tracked upwards unless marked as unfixed in unstable this should mark unstable as not containing libxml as well but etch as unfixed. Cheers Nico -- Nico Golde - http://www.ngolde.de - [email protected] - GPG: 0xA0A0AAAA For security reasons, all text in this mail is double-rot13 encrypted.
pgpodQNw44lLF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Secure-testing-team mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/secure-testing-team
