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

Bug#695748: marked as done (unblock: ferm/2.1-4)

Your message dated Sat, 15 Dec 2012 21:53:42 +0100
with message-id <50CCE356.7010905@thykier.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#695748: unblock: ferm/2.1-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #695748,
regarding unblock: ferm/2.1-4
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.)


-- 
695748: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=695748
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 ferm

Hi,

I fixed two nasty bugs (I think at least #694334 is RC) in 2.1-4.

#694334: ferm: modifies files under /etc:
	if an admin decided to have different permissions for
	/etc/ferm those will be overwritten with the wheezy update

#695677: domain within a function produces syntax error
	having a function where "domain (ip ip6)" is used is rejected
	by the version in wheezy which is a regression, the patch got
	backported from upstreams git.

The fixes are both oneliners and I think having them in wheezy would
be good. The debdiff is attached. 

diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index e1109cc..d5ba908 100644
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,13 @@
+ferm (2.1-4) unstable; urgency=low
+
+  * [4ede608] Backport a patch that fixes a regression in functions containing
+    ip and ip6 domains
+    (Closes: #695677)
+  * [22d4a48] don't modify permissions on /etc/ferm during upgrade
+    (Closes: #694334)
+
+ -- Alexander Wirt <formorer@debian.org>  Tue, 11 Dec 2012 22:59:18 +0100
+
 ferm (2.1-3) unstable; urgency=low
 
   [ Salvatore Bonaccorso ]
diff --git a/debian/ferm.postinst b/debian/ferm.postinst
index 0f8ea64..ab50cb2 100644
--- a/debian/ferm.postinst
+++ b/debian/ferm.postinst
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ if [ "$action" = configure ]; then
     sed -i "s/^ENABLED=.*$/ENABLED=\"$VALUE\"/" /etc/default/ferm
 
     # make the firewall configuration readable only by root and group adm
-    if [ -d /etc/ferm ]; then
+    if [ -d /etc/ferm ] && [ -z $version ]; then
         chown -R root:adm /etc/ferm
         chmod 2750 /etc/ferm
     fi
diff --git a/src/ferm b/src/ferm
index b83048d..2214969 100755
--- a/src/ferm
+++ b/src/ferm
@@ -2052,7 +2052,7 @@ sub enter($$) {
                         new_level(%inner, \%rule);
                         set_domain(%inner, $domain) or next;
                         $script->{tokens} = [ @$tokens ];
-                        enter($lev, \%inner);
+                        enter(0, \%inner);
                     }
 
                     $script->{tokens} = $old_tokens;

unblock ferm/2.1-4

Thanks in advance

Alex

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On 2012-12-12 10:21, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
> 
> Please unblock package ferm
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I fixed two nasty bugs (I think at least #694334 is RC) in 2.1-4.
> 
> #694334: ferm: modifies files under /etc:
> 	if an admin decided to have different permissions for
> 	/etc/ferm those will be overwritten with the wheezy update
> 
> #695677: domain within a function produces syntax error
> 	having a function where "domain (ip ip6)" is used is rejected
> 	by the version in wheezy which is a regression, the patch got
> 	backported from upstreams git.
> 
> The fixes are both oneliners and I think having them in wheezy would
> be good. The debdiff is attached. 
> 
> [...]
> 
> unblock ferm/2.1-4
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> Alex
> 
> 

Unblocked, thanks.

~Niels

--- End Message ---
Reply to: