From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42831) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dYAgY-00063v-TM for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 08:36:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dYAgU-0003WS-OB for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 08:36:06 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:46020) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dYAgU-0003WG-IS for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 08:36:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dYAgU-0000Tr-5s for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 08:36:02 -0400 Subject: bug#27769: [PATCH] gnu: pcre: Update replacement to 8.41 [fixes CVE-2017-{7244, 7245, 7246}]. Resent-To: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Message-ID: Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 08:34:23 -0400 From: Leo Famulari Message-ID: <20170720123423.GB29905@jasmine.lan> References: <47b5258899cf05aea85ef2af8a9e15207830cbb9.1500517348.git.leo@famulari.name> <878tjjzesv.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gatW/ieO32f1wygP" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <878tjjzesv.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 27769-done@debbugs.gnu.org --gatW/ieO32f1wygP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:35:28AM +0200, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > > - (patches (search-patches "pcre-CVE-2017-7186.patch")))))) >=20 > Should we remove this patch as well? Yes! I was rushing to finish this at the end of the night and I sent a preliminary version of this change by mistake :/ > For =E2=80=98core-updates=E2=80=99, I suggest we keep 8.41 it as a graft.= WDYT? Agreed, I think we should not make any more big changes on that branch unless we have to. Pushed as 426b0b898f70a58133d80779980f163a5761686e. --gatW/ieO32f1wygP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEsFFZSPHn08G5gDigJkb6MLrKfwgFAllwo08ACgkQJkb6MLrK fwh0FQ//X/a8WdP/ZNRoECUUtzFYln33T0qSPuN01pINeZV+gxLxt34labhZOmrj i3FZgnqoFC/mFzTZmo3zHrIcFjv3np9FMS2pa/7ZQMnGiKk4/8a/hj2YwLzzQnBh C04ccvNh+UjyjyLf0o1qpYPKCaRrk0vyKKTTHLJ8W8f5f3+qt1WeHY+KtvKa3Aag uzlQZbOpT1K/WKK/0PZz7BBucasT0yvu5No4d05dAYxmRx9o5EH4I+9m/3+r9EDP QKwOmwf4fTMBUzrLJVG8VzyGVTOSHmr/HpVfihFZLsNNASvm8Z3qIPSAHPwGl/FE Dp8k7mspFwtMmbewcTudWY5dra0Qy9e+wblhw6A+MU7XIy+wqLe7+N+KUTw2Mlfr LmfnQmrGwBmz+loR+cSugIHuQmbOEQHWHDkRu1mKNKHJ/VI92SU1eKjfSevl8QOK 2U3vMchz/6XhGGcZReB30DScBdTbSHmO3y/HEKhKOI7rOLhg+G+xcyM6UWvfdPV5 vTxEqZUF1H32ULrSYFGyStN7bZp9odS+sZOhGhW9yUrBARs55xFUo+aiZ2onKz2k gGEfwDtu+p6n4CMfJIFV7iF2uej2f2zIxZETn15GfDbKt2p496I/CH+Ab3+OC+Y6 BFvbpy3EasZopvlgGkU5WDRRe6K030rYiD03UypmT0amOQ5O1oU= =1mta -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gatW/ieO32f1wygP--