Hi LaMont, On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 06:59:18PM -0700, LaMont Jones wrote: > Please consider util-linux 2.12p-4 for Sarge. Relevant changelog chunk > below. > Cons: > - it's a change Additional con: - depends on a newer version of e2fsprogs than we currently have in testing, which requires updating roughly a half dozen frozen libraries > Pros: > - Fixes for a number of bugs. 2.12j through 2.12p were the result of > a bunch of activity between upstream and myself. > - 2.12p-1 has been in sid since December, and -2 through -4 change > next to nothing (yes, "next to nothing" includes that security vul > compliments of libblkid1 fixed in -4.) > - 2.12-10 (currently in sarge) represents only minor tweaks since the > previous significant work back in Feb 2004. > - 2.12p-4 uses dpatch instead of a large monolithic .diff.gz, making > it much easier to maintain down the road. > thoughts? Is the severity of any of the various bugs fixed important or higher? > util-linux (2.12p-4) unstable; urgency=low > * Depend on newer libblkid1. Hrm, this looks like a bug in libblkid1 to me, since the shlibs were not updated when the new public functions were added... -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature