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

Bug#601199: marked as done (unblock: mono-debugger/2.6.3-2.1)



Your message dated Thu, 04 Nov 2010 19:42:40 +0100
with message-id <4CD2FEA0.9090108@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#601199: release.debian.org: unblock: mono-debugger/2.6.3-2.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #601199,
regarding unblock: mono-debugger/2.6.3-2.1
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
601199: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=601199
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock

Please unblock package mono-debugger. It fixes CVE-2010-3369.

unblock mono-debugger/2.6.3-2.1

-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.ISO-8859-15@euro (charmap=ISO-8859-15)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash



--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 11/03/2010 06:41 PM, jari wrote:
> On 2010-11-03 00:09, Julien Cristau wrote:
> | On Wed, Nov  3, 2010 at 00:50:54 +0200, Jari Aalto wrote:
> | 
> | > > "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk>
> | > > > On Sun, 2010-10-24 at 12:40 +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> | > > > Please unblock package mono-debugger. It fixes CVE-2010-3369.
> | > >
> | > > I'm not really convinced about the utility of this:
> | > >
> | > > ++   tmp=$(echo "$1" | sed -e 's/::\+// ; s/^:// ; s/:$//' )
> | > >
> | > > The code is already using ${LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH} to only
> | > > append LD_LIBRARY_PATH if it is non-empty, resolving the issue with the
> | > > script (adding empty items without the user realising).
> | > >
> | > > If I want to explicitly add empty items to LD_LIBRARY_PATH before
> | > > calling the debugger, and potentially shoot myself badly in the foot,
> | > > should I not be permitted to do so?
> | > 
> | > I can provide *-2.2 without the patchclean(). Let me know if new upload
> | > is ok.
> | > 
> | Yes please.
> 
> Uploaded,

Thanks for the upload.

Unblocked.

Regards,

-- 
Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي
http://dogguy.org/


--- End Message ---

Reply to: