On Dec 15, "Francesco P. Lovergine" wrote:
> I'm not happy of having to run autotools at every build or maintaining
> another ugly autoconf patch of such a kind.
It's not like you have a choice anyway, autoreconfiguration is mandatory
for packages which use libtool.
Look at the udev package for a
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 09:41:46PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 08:13:23PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 07:39:59PM +0100, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> > >
> > > I am wondering, though, why proftpd ships its own copy of libltdl instead
> > > of
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 08:13:23PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 07:39:59PM +0100, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> >
> > I am wondering, though, why proftpd ships its own copy of libltdl instead
> > of
> > using the system version, which would avoid this kind of bugs to be
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 07:39:59PM +0100, Sune Vuorela wrote:
>
> I am wondering, though, why proftpd ships its own copy of libltdl instead of
> using the system version, which would avoid this kind of bugs to be have to
> be
> fixed in proftpd at all.
>
This is completely another problem. In
On Sunday 13 December 2009 12:13:38 Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> Package: proftpd-dfsg
> Version: 1.3.0-1
>
> As already communicated to secteam on friday, this issue does not
> apply even with old versions, because external modules are taken from the
> /usr/lib/proftpd directory only in mod_ds
Package: proftpd-dfsg
Severity: grave
Tags: security
Hi,
The following CVE (Common Vulnerabilities & Exposures) id was
published for libtool. I have determined that this package embeds a
vulnerable copy of the libtool source code. However, since this is a
mass bug filing (due to so many package
6 matches
Mail list logo
