Herbert wrote:
> Yes that isn't easy to check apart from the fact that if there isn't
> an arch update after a security update to kernel-source, then that arch
> is probably vulnerable. If you've got an idea on how this can improved,
> please let us know.
A possibility would be to define a versionning scheme on the arch-dep
kernel-patches. You issue version 2.4.20-8, and others release a new
version as 2.4.20-8, and then possibly further -8.1 and such, and
don't bump to -9 before you do.
That steps into the NMU numbering-space, but I suppose we can expect
NMUs on arch kernel-patches to be quite rare anyway. And we could
give a NMU numbering-space with 2 dots, by making the 1st revision of
an arch patch to be -8.0 at first.
Does it make sense ?
--
Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Why make M$-Bill richer & richer ?
Debian-related: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Support Debian GNU/Linux:
Pro: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Freedom, Power, Stability, Gratuity
http://ydirson.free.fr/ | Check <http://www.debian.org/>
