Your message dated Sun, 12 Dec 2010 19:34:31 +0000 with message-id <1292182471.3595.1269.camel@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org> and subject line Re: Bug#606258: unblock: distcc/3.1-3.2 has caused the Debian Bug report #606258, regarding unblock: distcc/3.1-3.2 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.) -- 606258: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=606258 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
- Subject: unblock: distcc/3.1-3.2
- From: Moritz Muehlenhoff <jmm@debian.org>
- Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 22:25:28 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20101207212528.6504.84287.reportbug@localhost.localdomain>
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package distcc. It fixes another of the yet CVE-less PYTHONPATH issues. unblock distcc/3.1-3.2 -- 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 ---
- To: "Steve M. Robbins" <steve@sumost.ca>, 606258-done@bugs.debian.org
- Cc: Moritz Muehlenhoff <jmm@inutil.org>, Moritz Muehlenhoff <jmm@debian.org>, carsten@wolffcarsten.de
- Subject: Re: Bug#606258: unblock: distcc/3.1-3.2
- From: "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk>
- Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2010 19:34:31 +0000
- Message-id: <1292182471.3595.1269.camel@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20101209043134.GE3323@sumost.ca>
- References: <[🔎] 20101207212528.6504.84287.reportbug@localhost.localdomain> <[🔎] 1291761306.4384.479.camel@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org> <[🔎] 20101208183201.GA2553@galadriel.inutil.org> <[🔎] 20101209043134.GE3323@sumost.ca>
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 22:31 -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 07:32:01PM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 07, 2010 at 10:35:06PM +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > > > Looking at the diff, either the original code is more broken than the > > > general case, or it's intentionally adding an empty entry to PYTHONPATH. > > > It seems an odd choice, but part of me does wonder if it was > > > intentional. > > > > > > - "PYTHONPATH='$pythonpath::$PYTHONPATH' " \ > > > + "PYTHONPATH='$pythonpath${PYTHONPATH:+:$PYTHONPATH}' " \ > > > > Adding the NMUer and the maintainer to CC. > > I did the NMU. I simply assumed the original code is in error: I > can't imagine why the script would want the current dir in the > PYTHONPATH. Unblocked. Regards, Adam
--- End Message ---