[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Would it be possible to provide Xorp 1.5 in lenny?

Dear debian-release team,

Xorp in lenny and sid is at version 1.5~cvs.20080519-1, this version is
not however, a final release and has bugs that have been fixed in the
1.5 release which was released a few months later (22nd of July) but we were
not able to package+upload it in time for the freeze, which happened just a
week later.

We have uploaded a 1.5 version to experimental but would like to know the
opinion of the release team on having 1.5 in sid and unblocking it for lenny.
Would that be possible?

One of the bug that fixes this final release is #493157 which basicly means
that in the current version in testing IPv4 multicast routing does not work.
Upstream has also fixed #494223, which makes it possible to compile Xorp
if using a 2.6.26 kernel.

These are not the only bugfix, there have been fixes in the MFEA code [0], BGP
[1] and OSPF routing as well as the tool used to control Xorp (xorpsh [3]).

There have been also some improvements in the code:

- support for VLAN tagging
- support for setting interfaces' bandwidth
- support for OLSR (RFC 3626 Optimized Link State Routing Protocol)
- an up to date implementation of OSPFv3
- builds with Linux kernel 2.6.26, which means that IPv6 multicast routing
  should be now possible
- support for daemonization of the router manager
- support for configuration of firewalling within xorp (disabled, in the 1.5
  build for Debian however)

And, of course, its documentation has been updated for this release.

Needless to say, we, the XORP maintainers, would be more comfortable
providing support in the next release (lenny) of a full release and not a CVS
snapshot, as is currently provided. Specially if we are talking of *security*
support for the package, as it will be more difficult to backport any
security fixes introduced in the package if we are using the CVS release.

We would appreciate some advice on how to proceed with this package, thanks.


Javier Fernandez-Sanguino





Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: