Re: Sarge kernels and Volatile
* Horms (email@example.com) [050801 12:42]:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:14:24PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Horms (firstname.lastname@example.org) [050801 12:01]:
> > > On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 11:52:48AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > > Yes, that was about my intention as well. So, yes, please move forward
> > > > with 2.4.27 and 2.6.8 and send a list of recommended updates.
> > > I need to go through the BTS and see what else could go in.
> > > But what I have right now is listed at in the following Changelogs.
> > >
> > > http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/kernel/trunk/kernel/source/kernel-source-2.6.8-2.6.8/debian/changelog?op=file&rev=0&sc=0
> > > http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/kernel/trunk/kernel/i386/kernel-image-2.6.8-i386-2.6.8/debian/changelog?op=file&rev=0&sc=0
> > from a quick glance at these, there is nothing I could see directly that
> > seems inappropriate. What I would however like is that all
> > security-releated issues are noted with their cve id.
> Agreed. All the CVE entries that I am aware of are in there.
> Unfortunately CVE destribtions for kernel bugs are vauge, and it is
> often very difficult to determine which bug goes with which CVE and
> which patch. Any contributions in this area are more than welcome.
> Just drop a a mail to debian-kernel and CC me.
Yes, I know that this is sometimes quite hard, and that this is not your
fault. Doesn't make me really more happy though :(
> > So, please go on with this, and as soon as you are ready, we can upload.
> > However, there is one (minor) issue: I want that the version string
> > shows up the word "volatile" so that we cannot get into a version clash
> > with the standard archive, so please change also that at some
> > appropriate time. :)
> Ok, so something like 2.6.8-16 -> 2.6.8-17volatile-1 ?
For example, yes. Of course, if you do another upload to unstable, you
must make sure that the unstable version is larger than the volatiles
> > Also, I would like to have kernel images for as many architectures
> > included as possible, but I'm not going to wait indefinitly for all
> > archs to catch up.
> I think the best way would be to get the source into volatile
> and then prod the other achitecture maintainers. In the past
> this seems to have taken about 2 weeks. But I am happy to put them
> somewhere else first if you think that is a good idea.
Ok. Please feel free to upload the packages as soon as you consider it
appropriate. The source package will however stay in
sarge-proposed-updates/volatile until there are enough binary packages
(i.e. at least i386, amd64, powerpc) to move it to sarge/volatile (but
that shouldn't be an issue for the maintainers to build).
Uploading goes to volatile-master.debian.net with anonymous ftp.