[arch-dev-public] [signoff] security update: kernel26-2.6.25.11-1
new kernel is in testing for both arches. no further changes expect the version bump. please signoff quickly. -Andy We (the -stable team) are announcing the release of the 2.6.25.11 kernel. It contains one bugfix, any user of the 2.6.25 kernel on x86-64 with untrusted local users is very STRONGLY recommended to upgrade. I'll also be replying to this message with a copy of the patch between 2.6.25.10 and 2.6.25.11 The updated 2.6.25.y git tree can be found at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.25.y.git and can be browsed at the normal kernel.org git web browser: http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.25.y.git;a=summar... thanks, greg k-h ------------- Makefile | 2 +- include/asm-x86/desc.h | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) Greg Kroah-Hartman (1): Linux 2.6.25.11 Michael Karcher (1): x86: fix ldt limit for 64 bit -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Andreas Radke <a.radke@arcor.de> wrote:
new kernel is in testing for both arches. no further changes expect the version bump. please signoff quickly.
-Andy
We (the -stable team) are announcing the release of the 2.6.25.11 kernel.
It contains one bugfix, any user of the 2.6.25 kernel on x86-64 with untrusted local users is very STRONGLY recommended to upgrade.
I'll also be replying to this message with a copy of the patch between 2.6.25.10 and 2.6.25.11
The updated 2.6.25.y git tree can be found at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.25.y.git and can be browsed at the normal kernel.org git web browser: http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.25.y.git;a=summar...
thanks,
greg k-h
-------------
Makefile | 2 +- include/asm-x86/desc.h | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Greg Kroah-Hartman (1): Linux 2.6.25.11
Michael Karcher (1): x86: fix ldt limit for 64 bit
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Signed off x86_64 Greg
Am Mon, 14 Jul 2008 19:45:46 +0300 schrieb "Grigorios Bouzakis" <grbzks@gmail.com>:
Signed off x86_64
Greg
Moved because x86_64 is the main affected architecture. Now please somebody signoff i686. -Andy
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 19:08 +0200, Andreas Radke wrote:
Am Mon, 14 Jul 2008 19:45:46 +0300 schrieb "Grigorios Bouzakis" <grbzks@gmail.com>:
Signed off x86_64
Greg
Moved because x86_64 is the main affected architecture.
Now please somebody signoff i686.
Why even package 2.6.25.11 for i686 if it's the same as 2.6.25.10? Seems like a waste of time/bandwidth. Dale
Am Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:24:01 -0400 schrieb Dale Blount <dale@archlinux.org>:
Why even package 2.6.25.11 for i686 if it's the same as 2.6.25.10? Seems like a waste of time/bandwidth.
Dale
Maybe you are right. But I'm only helping out here on kernel stuff and I'm not sure if this change doesn't touch i686 architecture at all: Makefile | 2 +- include/asm-x86/desc.h | 4 ++-- And we always want to satisfy our users with all the latest release even if they won't get any gain ;) -Andy
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Andreas Radke <a.radke@arcor.de> wrote:
Am Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:24:01 -0400 schrieb Dale Blount <dale@archlinux.org>:
Why even package 2.6.25.11 for i686 if it's the same as 2.6.25.10? Seems like a waste of time/bandwidth.
Dale
Maybe you are right. But I'm only helping out here on kernel stuff and I'm not sure if this change doesn't touch i686 architecture at all:
Makefile | 2 +- include/asm-x86/desc.h | 4 ++--
And we always want to satisfy our users with all the latest release even if they won't get any gain ;)
2.6.26 is out anyway though, so why bother? -Dan
On Mon, 14 Jul 2008, Dan McGee wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Andreas Radke <a.radke@arcor.de> wrote:
Am Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:24:01 -0400 schrieb Dale Blount <dale@archlinux.org>:
Why even package 2.6.25.11 for i686 if it's the same as 2.6.25.10? Seems like a waste of time/bandwidth.
Dale
Maybe you are right. But I'm only helping out here on kernel stuff and I'm not sure if this change doesn't touch i686 architecture at all:
Makefile | 2 +- include/asm-x86/desc.h | 4 ++--
And we always want to satisfy our users with all the latest release even if they won't get any gain ;)
2.6.26 is out anyway though, so why bother?
-Dan
FWIIW, signoff i686 -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
participants (5)
-
Andreas Radke
-
Dale Blount
-
Dan McGee
-
Eric Belanger
-
Grigorios Bouzakis