Re: [RFC] minimal build option for configure

Il giorno 25/ago/2010, alle ore 07.06, Amos Jeffries ha scritto:

> Luigi Gangitano wrote:
>> Il giorno 17/ago/2010, alle ore 09.17, Amos Jeffries ha scritto:
>>> Luigi Gangitano wrote:
>>>> In the meanwhile the next debian release has been fixed, so I'm now trying to push 3.1.6 to it. :-(
>>> Sorry should have pointed this out to you end of last week:
>>> http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/v3/3.1/changesets/squid-3.1-10063.patch
>>>
>>> As far as I know its the last of the critical fixes missed out of 3.1.6.
>>>
>>> 3.1.7 is due out in some few days now, but had a lot of portability fixes for other OS and HTTP/1.1 polishing which I don't think will get past the Debian minimal-change criteria.
>> Thanks. I will still try to push 3.1.7, and fall back to adding 10063 to the current 3.1.6-1. Is there any change worth adding to the next stable package? :-)
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "the next stable package"... fixes on 3.1.7 already? (none yet) or extra fixes on the 3.0 lenny package? (um, too many to count easily).

Sorry for the confusion, I meant: if 3.1.7 is not allowed, should I push any other change to 3.1.6-2 (which will be the 'next stable' package)? :-)

> In that other line of thought, there are some people in our users mailing list seeking newer 3.1 releases for Lenny. They are happy with using backports, but want newer than the one currently there. Is there anything like a timeline I can mention?

3.1.6-1 made to testing last week, I will backport it by the end of this week to bpo.

> This other patch made on 3.1.6 seems headed for CVE status now (only 3.1.6 affected):
> http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/v3/3.1/changesets/squid-3.1-10072.patch

Ok, this will go in the next package.

Regards,

L

--
Luigi Gangitano -- <luigi_at_debian.org> -- <gangitano_at_lugroma3.org>
GPG: 1024D/924C0C26: 12F8 9C03 89D3 DB4A 9972  C24A F19B A618 924C 0C26