Re: 1 package(s) to rebuild on i386/stable
Previously Dominik Kubla wrote:
> 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.
We don't do marketing, we do a good and stable free software
> 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).
Adding tcpwrapper support is not the same hardening. If you known
of real and serious bugs that are present in stable feel free to
file a bugreport, since that would be the only and only reasons to
update the package.
/email@example.com This space intentionally left occupied \
| firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |