Re: 1 package(s) to rebuild on i386/stable
On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 09:10:35AM +0100, Peter Makholm wrote:
> Dominik Kubla <kubla@sciobyte.de> writes:
>
> > IMHO that should be updated to nfs-utils-1.0 from upstream, if it
> > only were for the psychological impact of the 1.x version number.
>
> 'psychological impact' isn't a valid argument for putting new versions
> of software in stable.
Oh yes it is. That's why 0.3.3 was bumped to 1.0: because it is mature
and stable software. 0.3.3 implies otherwise. Lots of people stick
to the broken old unfsd for that reason and spread tales about the
dismal NFS performance of Linux. Not to mention FUD like Linux can't
do file locking over NFS or NFS v3... Releasing the next stable
Debian release with nfs-utils 0.1.9 is like releasing it with known
broken packages: a PR disaster.
BTW: 0.3.3/1.0 fixed quite some bugs over the 0.1.x series so an update
is also mandated by pure technical arguments. Not to mention that it
was hardened considerably against attacks (all daemons do now support
tcpwrappers!) and is necessary if you want to do NFS over TCP (which
needs an additional kernel patch but you can expect that to be merged
for 2.4.18).
Yours,
Dominik Kubla
--
ScioByte GmbH Zum Schiersteiner Grund 2 55127 Mainz (Germany)
Phone: +49 700 724 629 83 Fax: +49 700 724 629 84
1024D/717F16BB A384 F5F1 F566 5716 5485 27EF 3B00 C007 717F 16BB
Reply to: