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

Re: Your recent sqlite3 and neon27 uploads

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:38:39 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 22:48:51 +0100, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
> > Hi Adam,
> > 
> > On Mon, 2010-12-13 at 21:30 +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > > I noticed that you've recently uploaded new upstream versions of sqlite3
> > > and neon27 to unstable.  Were either of these uploads targetted at
> > > Squeeze?
> >  Yes, both. The easiest is neon27, which is a clean upload of the
> > previous one which contained the fixes as backported patches.
> > About sqlite3: it fixes important bugs like memory leaks[1][2][3][4][5],
> > a segfault[6], a maybe memory leak[7] and a buffer overread[8] among
> > others.
> > 
> Which of those fit the 'release critical' criteria?  Which of the
> changes necessitated a shlibs bump?
So as far as I can tell the possible reason for an shlibs bump here is
the addition to struct sqlite3_api_routines, which is used by
extensions.  However:

** Extensions that use newer APIs should first call the
** sqlite3_libversion_number() to make sure that the API they
** intend to use is supported by the library.  Extensions should
** also check to make sure that the pointer to the function is
** not NULL before calling it.

suggests that extensions are supposed to deal gracefully with older
versions of the library, so the bump shouldn't be necessary?


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: