[SRU] openvswitch 2.9.7
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ubuntu Cloud Archive |
Invalid
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned | ||
Queens |
Fix Released
|
Medium
|
Unassigned | ||
openvswitch (Ubuntu) |
Invalid
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned | ||
Bionic |
Fix Released
|
Medium
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
[Impact]
This release sports mostly bug-fixes and we would like to make sure all of our users have access to these improvements.
The update contains the following package updates:
* openvswitch 2.9.7
[Test Case]
The following SRU process was followed:
https:/
In order to avoid regression of existing consumers, the OpenStack team will run their continuous integration test against the packages that are in -proposed. A successful run of all available tests will be required before the proposed packages can be let into -updates.
The OpenStack team will be in charge of attaching the output summary of the executed tests. The OpenStack team members will not mark ‘verification-done’ until this has happened.
[Regression Potential]
In order to mitigate the regression potential, the results of the
aforementioned tests are attached to this bug.
CVE References
Changed in openvswitch (Ubuntu): | |
status: | New → Invalid |
description: | updated |
Changed in cloud-archive: | |
status: | New → Invalid |
Changed in openvswitch (Ubuntu Bionic): | |
status: | New → Triaged |
importance: | Undecided → Medium |
summary: |
- [SRU] openvswitch 2.9.6 + [SRU] openvswitch 2.9.7 |
description: | updated |
description: | updated |
13:02 <rbasak> jamespage: o/ reviewing bug 1881077. Where did you get the orig tarba
ll from?
13:03 <rbasak> There's a bunch of noise in the diff - looks like a switch to a git s
napshot so missing autoconf
13:03 <rbasak> I noticed you changed the watch file
13:03 <rbasak> But that's still a .gz, and the orig tarball you uploaded is an .xz a
nd I can't find that anywhere
13:59 <jamespage> rbasak: hmm odd - let me check
13:59 <jamespage> I'm pretty sure I uscan'ed but can't remember specifically
14:01 <rbasak> Thanks. I don't see any specific problem but it did seem odd so I thought I'd ask in case it was unintentional.