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

Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #1250024

Bug#1050256: AppArmor breaks locking non-fs Unix sockets

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 07:55:01PM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Hi John,
> 
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 10:12:52PM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > Hi John,
> > 
> > On Sat, Aug 03, 2024 at 09:35:25PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > > Hi John,
> > > 
> > > On Sun, May 26, 2024 at 01:39:07PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > For those watching this bug: John has prepared backports in his tree,
> > > > with both approaches:
> > > > 
> > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jj/linux-apparmor.git/log/?h=debian-two-patch-1780227
> > > > 
> > > > and
> > > > 
> > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jj/linux-apparmor.git/log/?h=debian-backport-1780227
> > > > 
> > > > (but with the open question which one will be submitted for stable.
> > > > >From upstream stable point of view probably the two patch backport
> > > > approach would be the preferred one).
> > > 
> > > We still have tis issue open for 6.1.y upstream TTBOMK. If you are
> > > confident as maintainer with any of the two approaches, would it be
> > > possible to submit them for stable? If the preferred one get then
> > > accepted and queued, we might already cherry-pick the solution for us,
> > > but at this point we can wait for the respective 6.1.y stable version
> > > which will include the fix.
> > 
> > Friendly ping. Any news here?
> 
> Anything we can do there to help on the decision which set of fixes
> could land in the 6.1.y stable series? Would it help if I prod Mathias
> to test both variants for feedback? 
> 
> Or is there a problem you envision already by trying to backport those
> fixes to upstream 6.1.y?
> 
> Thanks for your work, and sorry for pestering you again about it :(

Any news on this?

While at it, I noticed that in the above commits for
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jj/linux-apparmor.git/log/?h=debian-two-patch-1780227
or
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jj/linux-apparmor.git/log/?h=debian-backport-1780227

it might be worth adding a

Link: https://bugs.debian.org/1050256

Do you see any problems with any of the both you prepared? If not, is
there soemthing which you miss from us downstream?

Regards,
Salvatore

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

Thread

Bug#1050256: AppArmor breaks locking non-fs Unix sockets Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2025-06-14 22:10 +0200

csiph-web