Re: Advice for DLA needed entry
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 02:08:40PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> Den tis 5 jan. 2021 13:45Adrian Bunk <email@example.com> skrev:
> > NOTE: 20201129: buster-pu in #975932, will backport when in buster (bunk)
> > Before you've added your notes a month later this was the last note,
> > and if you did not look at the bug before doing anything else that's
> > something you should learn a lesson from.
> I did but it was still not clear to me whether the open cves were going to
> be addressed by the update and whether the update was for the postponed or
> the ones without. I did not realize that the planned update were for the
> postponed until you added the note after my email.
NOTE: 20201007: during last triage, I marked some CVEs as no-dsa, it'd be great to include
NOTE: 20201007: those fixes as well! \o/ (utkarsh)
NOTE: 20201108: 2.6.8-1.1 backported as first step
NOTE: 20201108: will try to update wireshark in the next
NOTE: 20201108: buster point release followed by another backport (bunk)
NOTE: 20201123: NMU for unstable prepared as first step (bunk)
NOTE: 20201129: buster-pu in #975932, will backport when in buster (bunk)
This is the complete list of the notes as they were for a month before
#975932 says it fixes 14 CVEs, and when you click on the debdiff in the
bug you see in debian/changelog what CVEs are fixed.
If anything was still not clear to you, asking before doing anything
would have been the correct action.
Shit happens, and this was a rather harmless mistake.
It was your choice to discuss this on a public mailing list,
and I do not have a problem with stating publicly that this
was your mistake.
The most weird thing is that you sent me two emails, but instead of
waiting for an answer started this discussion here less than 2 hours
after your first email.