Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > Luk Claes wrote: >>> okay, it looks like the problem was that the person who did the security >>> upload built the package in a sarge chroot without /proc mounted (i can >>> duplicate the problem unmounting /proc in my pbuilder chroot). >>> >>> so, my question is what are the next steps? can the security team just >>> trigger a rebuild/binNMU, or do we need another sourceful upload? if so >>> should i provide an update in debian/rules that checks for /proc to be >>> mounted just in case this happens again? >> I think I can schedule binNMUs now though the buildds have to have proc >> mounted beforehand or the one signing has to be careful enough not to >> sign if it's not yet fixed with the binNMU. >> >> So I guess that's up to the Security Team to decide. > > I don't really remember if/why procfs wasn't mounted. I build Sarge in a > chroot and Etch on a stable-only, real system. > > Unfortunately it wasn't spotted neither by myself, nor the people that > also tested the update prior to release. I'll add a note, that we > integrate the existing bin-checker into the planned security update > beta test program. > > Please go ahead with a binNMU: Only the broken i386 manual build > should be affected AFAICS.
binNMU scheduled. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
