Archives
Archives
| From: | Jakub Moc <jakub@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Only you can prevent broken portage trees | ||
| Date: | Mon, 30 Oct 2006 20:51:40 | ||
| Message-Id: | 454664A9.3040902@gentoo.org | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Only you can prevent broken portage trees by Ciaran McCreesh |
||
| 1 | Ciaran McCreesh napsal(a): |
| 2 | > | As you have might have noticed, they already have a newer version |
| 3 | > | stable. But apparently asking them to respond on a bug within 5 months |
| 4 | > | is way too much. :P |
| 5 | > |
| 6 | > Well yes, since there's no clear link between bugs and packages. Things |
| 7 | > can get stabled incidentally and for reasons other than the ones in one |
| 8 | > particular bug. |
| 9 | |
| 10 | Eh? Stabilizing for multiple security issues [1] is "incidental"?! |
| 11 | |
| 12 | [1] |
| 13 | http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2006-1516 |
| 14 | http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2006-1517 |
| 15 | http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2006-1518 |
| 16 | http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=132146 |
| 17 | |
| 18 | What on earth are you talking about here? And why almost 6 months is not |
| 19 | enough for someone to respond on a bug with a simple "we'll only support |
| 20 | newer versions and don't care about MySQL 4.0.x any more, go drop it"? |
| 21 | |
| 22 | |
| 23 | -- |
| 24 | Best regards, |
| 25 | |
| 26 | Jakub Moc |
| 27 | mailto:jakub@g.o |
| 28 | GPG signature: |
| 29 | http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E |
| 30 | Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E |
| 31 | |
| 32 | ... still no signature ;) |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Only you can prevent broken portage trees | Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@×××××××.org> |