Wednesday, June 5th, 2019

Time	Event
2:55p	Security updates for Wednesday Security updates have been issued by Debian (python-django), openSUSE (curl and libtasn1), Oracle (kernel), Red Hat (etcd, kernel-alt, and rh-python36-python-jinja2), Scientific Linux (thunderbird), SUSE (libvirt), and Ubuntu (db5.3, linux, linux-aws, linux-gcp, linux-kvm, linux-raspi2, linux, linux-aws, linux-gcp, linux-kvm, linux-raspi2, linux-snapdragon, linux, linux-aws, linux-kvm, linux-raspi2, linux-snapdragon, linux-aws-hwe, linux-hwe, linux-oracle, linux-hwe, and linux-raspi2, linux-snapdragon). (Comment on this)
3:52p	[$] How many kernel test frameworks? The kernel self-test framework (kselftest) has been a part of the kernel for some time now; a relatively recent proposal for a kernel unit-testing framework, called KUnit, has left some wondering why both exist. In a lengthy discussion thread about KUnit, the justification for adding another testing framework to the kernel was debated. While there are different use cases for kselftest and KUnit, there was concern about fragmenting the kernel-testing landscape. (Comment on this)
9:58p	[$] Seeking consensus on dh Debian takes an almost completely "hands off" approach to the decisions that Debian developers (DDs) can make in regard to the packaging and maintenance of their packages. That leads to maximal freedom for DDs, but impacts the project in other ways, some of which may be less than entirely desirable. New Debian project leader (DPL) Sam Hartman started a conversation about potential changes to the Debian packaging requirements back in mid-May. In something of a departure from the Debian tradition of nearly endless discussion without reaching a conclusion (and, possibly, punting the decision to the technical committee or a vote in a general resolution), Hartman has instead tried to guide the discussion toward reaching some kind of rough consensus. (Comment on this)

<< Previous Day

2019/06/05 [Calendar]

Next Day >>