First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 198385
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: FIXED
Assigned To: Gentoo Security <security@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Robert Buchholz <rbu@gentoo.org>
Add CC:
CC:
Remove selected CCs
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Flags: Requestee:
 
 
  ()

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 198385 depends on: 156984 Show dependency tree
Show dependency graph
Bug 198385 blocks:

Additional Comments: (this is where you put emerge --info)







View Bug Activity   |   Format For Printing   |   XML   |   Clone This Bug


Description:   Opened: 2007-11-07 17:47 0000
goffice ships a copy of PCRE which is be vulnerable to several security issues
as pointed out in bug #198198.

PCRE 7.3 fixes the issues mentioned. goffice 0.2.1  (current stable) ships
version 6.3 of PCRE. 

According to the ChangeLog goffice 0.3.7 requires uses the system PCRE.

Gnome-office, please advise.

------- Comment #1 From Robert Buchholz 2007-11-07 17:48:39 0000 -------
See bug 156984.

------- Comment #2 From Robert Buchholz 2007-11-20 00:46:49 0000 -------
Gnome-office, please advise.

------- Comment #3 From Gilles Dartiguelongue 2007-11-21 22:08:19 0000 -------
per bug #191555, gnumeric can't use newer versions of goffice (limited to <0.3)
we could put newer releases of gnumeric but they are still considered
development release. A 1.7.90 is out since yesterday so the stable release
shouldn't be too far from now.

@gnome-office, per the above paragraph, what's the best course of action ? I
can take care of bumping gnumeric and goffice if needed.

------- Comment #4 From Daniel Gryniewicz 2007-11-29 03:30:33 0000 -------
Ubuntu ships 1.7.11 in gutsy, so I'd say put a 1.7 version in the tree.

------- Comment #5 From Robert Buchholz 2007-12-04 01:15:46 0000 -------
ping.

------- Comment #6 From Gilles Dartiguelongue 2007-12-10 00:18:27 0000 -------
00:23 < EvaSDK> dang: hey, just so you know, I haven't commited work on goffice 
                bug because the goffice/gnumeric bump doesn't work yet
00:24 < EvaSDK> latest tests tend to show that goffice-0.4.3 doesn't export all 
                required symbol to let gnumeric-1.7.12 (last release to work 
                with 0.4) compile

------- Comment #7 From Gilles Dartiguelongue 2007-12-10 23:19:08 0000 -------
I've pushed the work on goffice slots into CVS. I hope I didn't break anything
and will check tomorrow morning on a "clean" box .

All apps besides gnumeric should already have relevant version checks thanks to
RobbieAB (on #-desktop). If anyone can/want to do gnumeric just ping me, I
couldn't make gnumeric-1.7.12 compile for me yet, and I'm not sure we want a
dev release for goffice 0.5 and gnumeric-1.7.9* in tree just yet (and I'm
pretty busy irl these days).

------- Comment #8 From Gilles Dartiguelongue 2008-01-01 18:55:00 0000 -------
hi security, ebuilds needed to close this bug are finally in the tree.

you'll need to get goffice-0.4, goffice-0.6 and gnumeric-1.8 before when can
ditch goffice-0.2

------- Comment #9 From Robert Buchholz 2008-01-01 22:16:22 0000 -------
[23:11] <rbu> EvaSDK: do i understand right we need both goffice 0.4.3 and
0.6.1 to be stable?
[23:11] <EvaSDK> rbu: afaik, not everything is compatible with goffice-0.6
[23:11] <EvaSDK> abiword-plugins and gnumeric compile against 0.6
[23:12] <EvaSDK> but it seems gnucash doesn't know about 0.6 yet

Arches, please test and mark stable x11-libs/goffice-0.4.3,
x11-libs/goffice-0.6.1 and app-office/gnumeric-1.8.0.
Target keywords : "alpha amd64 hppa ia64 ppc ppc64 sparc x86"

------- Comment #10 From Brent Baude 2008-01-02 00:22:57 0000 -------
OK took care of goffice-1.4  but bumped into a configure error with -1.6 on
both ppc64 and ppc.  

checking for GNOME... yes
checking for GOFFICE... configure: error: Package requirements (
        glib-2.0                >= 2.8.0
        gobject-2.0             >= 2.6.3
        gmodule-2.0             >= 2.6.3
        libgsf-1                >= 1.13.3
        libxml-2.0              >= 2.4.12
        pango                   >= 1.8.1
        pangocairo              >= 1.8.1
        libart-2.0              >= 2.3.11
        cairo                   >= 1.2.0
        cairo-svg               >= 1.2.0
        cairo-pdf               >= 1.2.0
        cairo-ps                >= 1.2.0

        gtk+-2.0                >= 2.6.0
        libglade-2.0            >= 2.3.6

        gconf-2.0
        libgnomeui-2.0          >= 2.0.0
        libgsf-gnome-1          >= 1.12.2
) were not met:

No package 'cairo-svg' found

How do you guys want to deal with this?  I assume this is x11-libs/libsvg-cairo
?  

------- Comment #11 From Saleem Abdulrasool 2008-01-02 01:35:31 0000 -------
Yeap, needs a built_with_use which I added.

------- Comment #12 From Jeroen Roovers 2008-01-02 06:14:04 0000 -------
Stable for HPPA.

------- Comment #13 From Christian Faulhammer 2008-01-02 10:17:44 0000 -------
x86 stable

------- Comment #14 From Jakub Moc 2008-01-02 10:20:08 0000 -------
*** Bug 204018 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #15 From Raúl Porcel 2008-01-02 14:29:42 0000 -------
alpha/ia64/sparc stable

------- Comment #16 From Brent Baude 2008-01-02 17:11:01 0000 -------
ppc and ppc64 done

------- Comment #17 From Peter Weller 2008-01-10 19:41:29 0000 -------
amd64 done, apologies about the delay.

------- Comment #18 From Pierre-Yves Rofes 2008-01-10 19:53:08 0000 -------
glsa request filed

------- Comment #19 From Samuli Suominen 2008-01-10 20:13:02 0000 -------
This is how keywords look in tree now,

gnumeric-1.6.3.ebuild:KEYWORDS="alpha amd64 hppa ia64 ppc ppc64 sparc x86"
gnumeric-1.8.0.ebuild:KEYWORDS="alpha amd64 ~hppa ia64 ppc ppc64 sparc x86"

Did hppa miss it?

------- Comment #20 From Jeroen Roovers 2008-01-11 13:08:22 0000 -------
...

------- Comment #21 From Pierre-Yves Rofes 2008-01-30 22:44:27 0000 -------
GLSA 200801-19, sorry for the delay.

First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug