Yves-Alexis Perez writes:
> On mer., 2012-02-01 at 10:34 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 10:24:40AM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
>> > On mar., 2012-01-31 at 11:01 -0500, micah anderson wrote:
>> > > What is stopping you from creating another package, that provides the
On 02/01/2012 06:41 PM, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
[...]
> Now indeed when doing the job for Squeeze kernel it's a bit less
> straightforward because of the huge amount of driver backports, but from
> my own experience, the conflicts are still mostly about changed context
> lines.
Remember, just be
Am 03.02.2012 03:15, schrieb Russell Coker:
Some shared libraries have code which can't be run without an
executable
stack, it's a small number of libraries that are written in assembler
code.
We want to allow running them but don't want to give all programs
permission
to execute code on the s
On Fri, 3 Feb 2012, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> Wasn't it once the case with PaX that packages have to be compiled
> specially? Or some ELF headers added or so?
Some shared libraries have code which can't be run without an executable
stack, it's a small number of libraries that are written
On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 00:34 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> There is an easy way to benefit from it.
Well still the user wouldn't know how to configure it...
Actually I must admit that I haven't followed PaX/grsec now for some
time (mainly due to the deb package being always out of date in sid).
Was
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 12:55:59AM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-02-02 at 12:18 +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> > The current approach of having a kernel patch package seems to work well.
> Phew... well there are many people running at >stable... and for
> them it does not
On Thu, 2012-02-02 at 12:18 +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> The current approach of having a kernel patch package seems to work well.
Phew... well there are many people running at >stable... and for
them it does not... as the package seems more or less orphaned.
Also,.. configuring something com
> On do, 2012-02-02 at 12:18 +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Feb 2012, dann frazier wrote:
> > > Whilte it may help the kernel team to not have to worry about problems
> > > in the grsec flavor when preparing uploads, preventing delays for the
> > > non-grsec images. But, that just push
Perhaps you should contact Julien Tinnes of http://kernelsec.cr0.org/
He has been too busy to work on the kernels lately but maybe he wants to
help.
On do, 2012-02-02 at 12:18 +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Feb 2012, dann frazier wrote:
> > Whilte it may help the kernel team to not
On Thu, 2 Feb 2012, dann frazier wrote:
> Whilte it may help the kernel team to not have to worry about problems
> in the grsec flavor when preparing uploads, preventing delays for the
> non-grsec images. But, that just pushes the coordination down a ways -
> for stable updates we would need to ad
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 02:32:19PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 10:51 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > On mer., 2012-02-01 at 10:34 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 10:24:40AM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > > > On mar., 2012-01-31 at 11:01 -
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 06:41:43PM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> On mer., 2012-02-01 at 14:32 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 10:51 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > > On mer., 2012-02-01 at 10:34 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 10:24:40AM +
On mer., 2012-02-01 at 14:32 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 10:51 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > On mer., 2012-02-01 at 10:34 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 10:24:40AM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > > > On mar., 2012-01-31 at 11:01 -0500,
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 10:51 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> On mer., 2012-02-01 at 10:34 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 10:24:40AM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > > On mar., 2012-01-31 at 11:01 -0500, micah anderson wrote:
> > > > What is stopping you from creating
On mer., 2012-02-01 at 10:34 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 10:24:40AM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > On mar., 2012-01-31 at 11:01 -0500, micah anderson wrote:
> > > What is stopping you from creating another package, that provides the
> > > kernel with grsecurity patc
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 10:24:40AM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> On mar., 2012-01-31 at 11:01 -0500, micah anderson wrote:
> > What is stopping you from creating another package, that provides the
> > kernel with grsecurity patches applied? Don't bother the kernel team
> > with it, and just mai
On mar., 2012-01-31 at 11:01 -0500, micah anderson wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:26:50 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez
> wrote:
> > So I think it's perfectly clear that nor Debian nor Grsecurity are
> > really interested in Debian shipping a Grsecurity kernel.
>
> Well, I don't think its fair to say
On 02/01/2012 12:01 AM, micah anderson wrote:
> What is stopping you from creating another package, that provides the
> kernel with grsecurity patches applied? Don't bother the kernel team
> with it, and just maintain it yourself in the archive? Its free software
> afterall.
>
> micah
>
Having
On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:26:50 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> On lun., 2012-01-30 at 14:08 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 11:05 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > > (adding few CC:s to keep track on the bug)
> > >
> > > On dim., 2012-01-29 at 21:26 +, Ben Hutchings wr
On lun., 2012-01-30 at 14:08 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 11:05 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > (adding few CC:s to keep track on the bug)
> >
> > On dim., 2012-01-29 at 21:26 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 20:57 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
>
20 matches
Mail list logo
