[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

my LTS january



repost from http://layer-acht.org/thinking/blog/20150205-lts-january-2015/
(it's better formatted there)

# My LTS January

It was very nice to hear many appreciations for our work on [Squeeze LTS]
(https://wiki.debian.org/LTS) during the last weekend at FOSDEM. People really 
seem to like and use LTS a lot - and start to rely on it. I was approached 
more than once about Wheezy LTS already...

(Most of my FOSDEM time I spent with [reproducible builds]
(https://fosdem.org/2015/schedule/event/stretching_out_for_trustworthy_reproducible_builds/) 
however, though this shall be the topic of another report, coming hopefully 
soon.)

So, about LTS. First I'd like to describe some current practices clearly:

 * the Squeeze LTS team might fix your package without telling the maintainers 
in advance nor directly: dak will send a mail as usual, but that might be the 
only notification you'll get. (Plus the DLA send out to the [debian-lts-
announce](https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/) mailing list.)
 * when we fix a package we will likely *not* push these changes into whatever 
VCS is used for packaging. So when you start working on an update (which is 
great), please check whether there has been an update before. (We don't do 
this because we are mean, but because we normally don't have commit access to 
your VCS...
 * we totally appreciate help from maintainers and everybody else too. We just 
don't expect it, so we don't go and ask each time there is a DLA to be made. 
Please do support us & please do talk to us! :-)

I hope this clarifies things. And as usual, things are open for discussion and 
best practices will change over time.


In January 2014 I spent 12h on Debian LTS work and managed to get four DLAs 
released, plus I've marked some CVEs as not affecting squeeze. The DLAs I 
released were:

 * [DLA 139-1 for eglibc](https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-
announce/2015/01/msg00012.html) fixing CVE-2015-0235 also known as the "Ghost" 
vulnerability. The update itself was simple, testing needed some more 
attention but then there were also many many user requests asking about the 
update, and some were providing fixes too. And then many people were happy, 
though one person seriously complained at FOSDEM that the squeeze update was 
released full six hours after the wheezy update. I think I didn't really reply 
to that complaint, though obviously this person was right ;)
 * [DLA 140-1 for rpm](https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-
announce/2015/01/msg00013.html) was quite straightforward to do, thanks to 
RedHat unsurprisingly providing patches for many rpm releases. There was just 
a lots of unfuzzying to do...
 * [DLA 141-1 for libksba](https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-
announce/2015/01/msg00015.html) had an easy to pick git commit in upstreams 
repo too, except that I had to disable the testsuite, but given the patch is 
100% trivial I decided that was a safe thing to do.
 * [DLA 142-1 for privoxy](https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-
announce/2015/01/msg00016.html) was a bit more annoying, despite clearly 
available patches from the maintainers upload to sid: first, I had to convert 
them from quilt to dpatch format, then I found that 2 ouf 6 CVEs were not 
affecting the squeeze version as the code ain't present and then I spent 
almost an hour in total to find+fix 10 whitespace difference in 3 patches. At 
least there was one patch which needed some more serious changes ;-)

Thanks to everyone who is supporting Squeeze LTS in whatever form! We like to 
hear from you, we love your contributions, but it's also totally ok to 
silently enjoy a good old quality distribution :-) 

Finally, something for the future: checking for previous DLAs is currently 
best done via said mailing list archive, as DLAs are not yet integrated into 
the website due to a dependency loop of blocking bugs... see [#761945]
(https://bugs.debian.org/761945) for a starting point.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: