Your message dated Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:45:16 +0200 with message-id <20120925184516.GE6116@radis.cristau.org> and subject line Re: Bug#685527: unblock: packagekit/0.7.6-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #685527, regarding unblock: packagekit/0.7.6-1 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.) -- 685527: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=685527 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
- Subject: unblock: packagekit/0.7.6-1
- From: Matthias Klumpp <matthias@tenstral.net>
- Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 18:16:24 +0200
- Message-id: <20120821161624.6809.86753.reportbug@sirius>
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package packagekit PackageKit 0.7.6 is a bugfix-only release, which fixes some bugs (some of them can cause crashes) and one RC bug reported against Debian. I recomment accepting this version, as the changes are small and the stability of PackageKit is increased. I added a report about all changes affecting Debian to the changelog. If necessary, I can go through every single patch, but I don't think that's necessary - most changes are simple. Kind regards, Matthias unblock packagekit/0.7.6-1 -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Matthias Klumpp <matthias@tenstral.net>, 685527-done@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#685527: unblock: packagekit/0.7.6-1
- From: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:45:16 +0200
- Message-id: <20120925184516.GE6116@radis.cristau.org>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] CAKNHny-8-6Ax0-dR6DcMkbKjR7EcBM5MX5N47vMDXhy+SWzRMA@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <20120821161624.6809.86753.reportbug@sirius> <[🔎] 20120903101811.GW6588@radis.cristau.org> <[🔎] CAKNHny-b6x=kXhYHxw4=5WjEuqA+-SR0K_QbTfHANe8A8uXEHw@mail.gmail.com> <[🔎] CAKNHny-8-6Ax0-dR6DcMkbKjR7EcBM5MX5N47vMDXhy+SWzRMA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 15:46:10 +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote: > aptcc: Don't use tempfile with fixed name for conffiles: > Resolves security issue in Debian, tracked as RC bug #678189 > See http://gitorious.org/packagekit/packagekit/commit/e6e33f54dcc9b0058134e0d2584c2ee110ca0340 > It's a bit weird to see +(undef, $template_fname) = tempfile('/tmp/pkconffileXXXXXX', SUFFIX => '.template'); followed by +open (TEMPLATE, ">$template_fname"); Why not use the filehandle returned by tempfile? Anyway, unblocked the current version, sorry for the delay and thanks a lot for breaking down the changes. Cheers, JulienAttachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--- End Message ---