Hi, Anthony Towns wrote:
> If someone
> would like to volunteer whose not in with the security team, or a
> release assistant, please talk to herr DPL about doing so, rather than
> me.
[ patiently waiting for AM approval ]
Will do.
And, thanks for the info. Whether to further automate this (i.e
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:40:25AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> An upload to testing-proposed-updates is not the same as an upload to
> testing-security, AFAIK (different upload queue, different machinery).
> But it was my understanding that both were in working order, they just
> aren't used --
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 05:19:17PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:26:35PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> >> No, it's sitting there, waiting for someone to use it. After a year's
> >> neglect it might need some metaphorical oil on its hinges
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 04:22:30AM -0700, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 09:03:06PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:09:48AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:13:19PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 07:12
Hi, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:26:35PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> No, it's sitting there, waiting for someone to use it. After a year's
>> neglect it might need some metaphorical oil on its hinges and some
>> dusting, but it really is there. I'm not just saying this for
>>
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:26:35PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 11:13:59AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 09:03:06PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:09:48AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:13:1
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 11:13:59AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 09:03:06PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:09:48AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:13:19PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 07:12:1
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 09:03:06PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:09:48AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:13:19PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 07:12:15PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > > Take the harden package, or creat
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 09:03:06PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:09:48AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:13:19PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 07:12:15PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > > Take the harden package, or creat
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:09:48AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:13:19PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 07:12:15PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > Take the harden package, or create something similar: a package that
> > > conflicts with all versions o
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:13:19PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 07:12:15PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Take the harden package, or create something similar: a package that
> > conflicts with all versions of packages with known security holes.
>
> Why not just /fix/ the hol
On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 07:12:15PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Take the harden package, or create something similar: a package that
> conflicts with all versions of packages with known security holes.
Why not just /fix/ the holes? Is uploading a package with a well known
patch _really_ that hard?
C
Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> If no one will step forward to do even this, then surely this service must
> not be considered particularly valuable.
Indeed. I am tempted to do it myself, but I don't currently use
testing..
--
see shy jo
pgp7DigvDPeLQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 07:12:15PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> So here's an alternative that would actually work:
>
> Take the harden package, or create something similar: a package that
> conflicts with all versions of packages with known security holes. Note
> that harden currently does not track
Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 11:53:31PM +0300, Chris Leishman wrote:
>
> > Then people can bitch and moan about package X not being available and
> > can do something to fix it (eg. finally start doing security updates
> > for testing). Or they can just put up with it. But e
15 matches
Mail list logo
