Re: nbd freeze exception?
Hi Julien,
On 12-03-13 10:39, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 06:55:42PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 13:58:24 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>>
>>> What are my chances of that being allowed in?
>>>
>> For r0 I would say it's too late. It should still be possible to
>> include fixes in a subsequent point release.
>
> Hrm.
>
> Some of these are things that I do think should be part of r0.
>
> How about this, then:
>
> - No new upstream release (I knew that was a long shot, but hey, I had
> to try)
> - I do upload a package with the following patches:
> - #685610 (important bug, failure of name-based exports when not used
> as root filesystem; patch in the BTS)
> - http://nbd.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=nbd/nbd;a=commitdiff;h=a0c3244429ea367defc0867cea8b2f351581c9d5
> (make nbd-server not go berserk upon receipt of a 'list exports'
> packet; fixes a remote DoS; not RC because it's disabled by default,
> but bad enough that it shouldn't be in the release)
> - http://nbd.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=nbd/nbd;a=commitdiff;h=9c8f822c023732ca9871358e2d324257e0290707
> (or equivalent; there is still some discussion on that patch. Fixes
> a false positive for a "request out of range" error that triggers on
> 32-bit machines only)
I've never received an answer to this.
Meanwhile, I've done two uploads (because I forgot to fix the 'list
exports' thing in the first upload, so I had to do another) with hardly
anything more than the above.
I'd appreciate it if you could look at the upload and possibly approve
it, although I of course concede that it's your prerogative to reject
the upload for testing, if you think it prudent.
Thanks,
--
Copyshops should do vouchers. So that next time some bureaucracy
requires you to mail a form in triplicate, you can mail it just once,
add a voucher, and save on postage.
Reply to: