Re: Bug#619404: v86d 0.1.10 for Squeeze?
On 09/22/2011 03:30 PM, Evgeni Golov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 09/18/2011 05:44 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>
>> Thanks. As mentioned on IRC, I'd prefer a diff that didn't involve
>> moving the "now upstream" patches in to the source, and dropping the
>> patches; it makes the diff noisier and less "obvious" than would be
>> ideal for stable.
>
> Working on it as we write.
http://pinky.die-welt.net/~evgeni/tmp/v86d-CVE-2011-1070-stable.diff
>> In terms of the other fixes, #525415 might be okay.
>
> Ok, including.
>
>> What's the intent
>> of
>>
>> * Add manual_add_modules uvesafb to the initramfs-hook (thanks
>> Ubuntu!)
>
> v86d needs the uvesafb module in the initrd if started there. The user
> would have to fiddle around himself with the initrd after installing
> v86d, now he hasn't as the file is added automatically.
Droped that, as it changes expected(?) behaviour in stable :)
>>> For oldstable I did not produce any debdiff, as I dont think anyone is
>>> using v86d there, but I could apply the only-CVE patch on the package.
>>
>> That would be good; thanks.
>
> Will do so.
http://pinky.die-welt.net/~evgeni/tmp/v86d-CVE-2011-1070-oldstable.diff
Didn't include the #525415 fix here, or would you say it's ok too?
regards
Reply to: