2008/7/22 Aaron Griffin :

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 9:32 PM, K. Piche wrote:

...

Sorry about the multiple pkgrels for i686. When Paul said libcap was missing I didn't realize it was never used in earlier releases.

I still haven't seen any concrete signoffs - just a conditional one from Paul for i686. I'll migrate the packages in a few days regardless.

Ping, now that this vulnerability is in the wild, can we try and get some signoffs ASAP.

It has been signed off by Paul. And now there is exploint in the wild! So please move it out of testing ASAP. -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)

On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 09:34 -0400, Dale Blount wrote:

On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 11:52 +0300, Roman Kyrylych wrote:

...

2008/7/22 Aaron Griffin :

...

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 9:32 PM, K. Piche wrote:

...

Sorry about the multiple pkgrels for i686. When Paul said libcap was missing I didn't realize it was never used in earlier releases.

I still haven't seen any concrete signoffs - just a conditional one from Paul for i686. I'll migrate the packages in a few days regardless.

Ping, now that this vulnerability is in the wild, can we try and get some signoffs ASAP.

It has been signed off by Paul. And now there is exploint in the wild! So please move it out of testing ASAP.

I'll add a i686 signoff, but it looks like we still need a x86_64 signoff. Anyone who can test, please hurry. This exploit is getting more dangerous by the minute.

Dig works fine on x86_64, so signoff for that. I'm not using bind itself, so I can't test. Though we don't have enough signoffs for x86_64, please move this thing quickly, either with or without signoffs. If x86_64 would be broken, we would have bugreports for that already.

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Hugo Doria wrote:

Signoff for i686.

I'm with Jan here. We must move this soon, whether we have sufficient signoffs for x86_64 or not.

Moved to core. Thanks for keeping up on this. Consider me implicitly signed off.

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Eric Belanger wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Hugo Doria wrote:

...

Signoff for i686.

I'm with Jan here. We must move this soon, whether we have sufficient signoffs for x86_64 or not.

Moved to core. Thanks for keeping up on this. Consider me implicitly signed off.

bind was a package from extra. I just fixed it.

Hah, sorry about that. Totally my fault 8)

On Sun, 2008-08-03 at 11:36 +0200, Andreas Radke wrote:

Am Mon, 21 Jul 2008 22:32:31 -0400 schrieb "K. Piche" :

...

Sorry about the multiple pkgrels for i686. When Paul said libcap was missing I didn't realize it was never used in earlier releases.

I still haven't seen any concrete signoffs - just a conditional one from Paul for i686. I'll migrate the packages in a few days regardless.

On a different note: anyone going to OLS this year?

k

only i686 packages have been updated/moved!

x86_64 packages are still missing. what's up?

i686 had two version bumps because it was built on a dirty system. The x86_64 didn't suffer from that problem. The resulting packages are the same, but version numbers differ.