Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 17:20:09 +0400
From: Solar Designer <>
Subject: Re: recent updates


On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 11:00:34AM +0400, (GalaxyMaster) wrote:
> I see that you've started to updated packages.

I hope I am done with pre-branching package updates, if I manage to find
time to create a 3.1 branch soon enough.

> This makes my life a bit
> harder since I need to double-check and correct my patches.  For
> example, I had an update to gnupg and now I need to compare that
> cumulative patch from ALT with all patches I have in my package in
> order to see whether there is something missing or not.  This is not
> that important but adds some workload where it could have been avoided.

I actually thought of this aspect before making this update myself, and
decided to proceed anyway.  If I saw you around at this very moment in
jabber, I would probably coordinate with you, but since you were not
around it was quicker for me to just proceed.  I guess your GnuPG update
was probably to 1.4.17 rather than .18, and I doubt you had a
CHANGES-current entry listing the CVEs and brief descriptions.

If you didn't add any new patches when updating GnuPG, then you don't
need to review the ALT patch now: I already did.

> As of beginning of July my first batch of changes to Owl was compiling
> flawlessly (under 10 iterations of 'make buildworld' to bring the system
> to a state where everything is updated).

Great!  This is on 32-bit only, right?  We still haven't coordinated
with you on your access to a machine for the 64-bit test rebuilds.

> Another problem is that I performed extensive tests on rebuilding the
> whole Owl userland with my updated packages.  Now, these updates render
> my tests obsolete since I need to rebuild everything again just to
> ensure that whatever has been changed is not broken by my updates. :(

That's life.  Two or four more rebuilds (i686 and x86_64, maybe repeated)
aren't that difficult to do.

> I wish you've spent this time to branch Owl as we discussed, so I could
> commit my part.  You could just have said that you need gnupg updated
> and it would have been done instantly (since my goal was to do updates
> of the userland and I clearly allocated time for this).

That's how it looks from your perspective, but for me it was preferable
to include these minor updates before the branching point.

> I still have a week to commit and fix whatever breaks as the result, but
> then I'll be likely unavailable for several months.  It's just a bit sad
> that I've spent almost 2 months to make this update and I cannot commit.
> Moreover, I'm afraid if I do not commit it soon we will just lose it.

Understood.  I'll plan to approve your commits before the end of this week.



Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.