Quoting Christian PERRIER (bubulle@debian.org): > Quoting Christian PERRIER (bubulle@debian.org): > > > Interesting question. I was indeed convinced that the patch made its > > way to 3.6 but it apparently didn't. Upstream bug tracker doesn't say > > a word about 3.6 or about the patch not being relevant for 3.6. > > > > I'm checking this with upstream....but it probably just got forgotten, > > so, yes, 3.6 could be affected by this bug. > > I uploaded a fixed package in s-p-u. On the other hand, I re-prodded > upstream so that the fix is included in the soon-to-come 3.6.2 > release. Upstream developer Volker Lendecke is 99% sure that he did check that 3.6 versions (thus wheezy and unstable) are *not* affected by this bug. (99% because he mentioned that it is "extremely unlikely" that he didn't check.....and I tend to give him credit for being careful about these things)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature