Re: debsecan vs. debian-volatile
> Actually, debsecan should be able to deal with this situation.
> I guess that CVE-2007-4560 is an example for this kind of problem.
> We've marked it as fixed in version 0.91.2-1, but volatile contains
> 0.91.2-0volatile1, which is less than that. I suppose we could mark
> it as fixed in 0.91.2, which would cover both cases (and wouldn't
> introduce a false negative if this bug was in fact fixed upstream).
That's great. Thanks both of you for the replies.