Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #1043848

Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1

From "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk>
Newsgroups linux.debian.bugs.dist, linux.debian.maint.boot, linux.debian.devel.release
Subject Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1
Date 2021-01-22 17:50 +0100
Message-ID <BA7DA-3a4-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (8 earlier) <Bxhg5-4Ic-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <BxYl3-5JB-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <BzOrf-ty-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <A25Gp-537-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <BzOrf-ty-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


On Thu, 2021-01-21 at 21:06 +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2021-01-16 19:14:53 [+0100], Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > So I went over the open issues and pull requests, and currently
> > don't see a reason not to upload it to unstable with those 2
> > patches. I don't know about any other regressions in 1.1.1.
> 
> The openssl package migrated to testing.
> I would prepare the pu package for Buster. Should I post here the
> complete diff or an incremental containing only the new patches?

Both would be good, please.

FWIW we're also fighting the clock (yet) again, as we're now a week
away from the freeze for the 10.8 point release. ("Yay"!)

> Once the openssl pu is acked I would open a pu for m2crypto. Or
> should it be done now? (just asking).

Assuming that a patched m2crypto will also build fine against openssl
1.1.1d, then there's no reason that the two shouldn't proceed in
parallel (i.e. feel free to file the m2crypto request already).

Regards,

Adam

Back to linux.debian.bugs.dist | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> - 2021-01-09 00:20 +0100
  Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> - 2021-01-14 18:50 +0100
    Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> - 2021-01-14 19:10 +0100
      Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> - 2021-01-14 21:20 +0100
        Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> - 2021-01-16 19:20 +0100
          Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> - 2021-01-21 21:10 +0100
            Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> - 2021-01-22 17:50 +0100
              Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> - 2021-01-24 12:30 +0100
              Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> - 2021-01-24 13:10 +0100
              Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> - 2021-01-25 19:00 +0100
                Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> - 2021-01-25 20:10 +0100
                Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> - 2021-01-25 21:10 +0100
      Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> - 2021-01-28 00:40 +0100
        Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> - 2021-01-29 20:40 +0100
          Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> - 2021-02-02 00:00 +0100
            Bug#959469: buster-pu: package openssl/1.1.1g-1 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> - 2021-02-10 22:00 +0100

csiph-web