From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 14:44:36 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 5/5] package/glibc: bump to 2.27 In-Reply-To: <20180206105019.tqnsw3i5l44mt5vs@tarshish> (Baruch Siach's message of "Tue, 6 Feb 2018 12:50:19 +0200") References: <20180205205716.4279-1-romain.naour@gmail.com> <20180205205716.4279-5-romain.naour@gmail.com> <20180205210150.ok3hhfucmxu3uz3l@tarshish> <20180206105019.tqnsw3i5l44mt5vs@tarshish> Message-ID: <87d11itepn.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Baruch" == Baruch Siach writes: > Hi Arnout, > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 09:18:38AM +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: >> On 05-02-18 22:01, Baruch Siach wrote: >> > On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 09:57:16PM +0100, Romain Naour wrote: >> >> See: https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-announce/2018/msg00000.html >> >> https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Release/2.27 >> > Note that this is a security bump fixing CVE-2017-1000408, CVE-2017-1000409, >> > CVE-2017-16997, CVE-2018-1000001, and CVE-2018-6485. >> >> Even though this release fixes a number of CVEs, I wouldn't call it a security >> bump. Indeed, it also makes a number of potentially breaking feature updates, >> cfr. the memfd_create() change. >> >> So, I would indeed mention the CVE numbers in the commit message, but not put >> "security bump" in the title so that it doesn't mindlessly get applied to LTS >> branches. >> >> Now, in this particular case we made enough noise about it that it really >> doesn't matter what goes into the subject line :-) However I think it's good to >> converge on some conventions on how to tag LTS things. > I agree that this bump might not be suitable for the maintenance branches. But > I think we should consider it for the master branch, especially since we are > still early in the -rc cycle. Possibly, yes. Lets see how much blows up on next. Do you know if (some of) these issues are also fixed on the 2.26 branch? -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard