On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 03:59:24PM -0600, D J Hawkey Jr wrote: > Right now, these is exactly one such release, 4.3, for security fixes. > Will there always be exactly one, such that when 4.5 is released, 4.3 > will fall off the planet, and 4.4 takes its place? Or might there be two, > 4.3 and 4.4?
As far back as possible. Bad answer, I know, but it's much like the answer for 3.x. :( > This comes 'round to one of my original questions, too: Why, as an example, > isn't the DELACK patches Matt made recently considered "important" enough > to be backported to RELENG_4_3 (which I have more generically referred to > as RELENG_(current - 1) or RELENG_(release - 1))? It has been said that a > fix might be backported to RELENG_(current - 1) that isn't necessarily a > security issue; can't that be expanded to any (or perhaps just "major") > fixes that don't imply a new feature of RELENG_(current)? Because DELACK isn't a security problem. It's a performance problem. It's a serious performance problem, but not a security problem. They had to draw the line somewhere, and since the security-officer group is supporting this they get to call the shots. If you do a good enough job, perhaps you can wind up supporting this in the main source tree. :) > The site Michael and I have discussed will be hugely deficient in terms > of what can be made available to any previous release (compared to what > is applied to -STABLE), but as it sits right now, it would be better than > nought for those that can't stay -STABLE. Bingo. Something is better than nothing. -- Michael Lucas [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.blackhelicopters.org/~mwlucas/ Big Scary Daemons: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/q/Big_Scary_Daemons To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
