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? Cheers, Julien
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature