Hi, On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 03:17:26AM -0700, Xin LI wrote: > Speaking as my own: Base system needs more conservative QA process, > e.g. we want to minimize the change, we need to analyst the impact > (FWIW the security fix would negatively affect heavy traffic sites) > and document it (i.e. the security advisory), and we want to make the > change a one-time one (for instance, shall we patch libc's resolver as > well?), so rushing into a "presumably patched" state would not be a > very good solution.
I understand the reasons and that surely needs to be taken into account. Does that imply that the FreeBSD project got the information later than f.e. M$ or Debian, who are usually not really known for coming up too fast with such fixes? - Olli -- | Oliver Brandmueller | Offenbacher Str. 1 | Germany D-14197 Berlin | | Fon +49-172-3130856 | Fax +49-172-3145027 | WWW: http://the.addict.de/ | | Ich bin das Internet. Sowahr ich Gott helfe. | | Eine gewerbliche Nutzung aller enthaltenen Adressen ist nicht gestattet! |
pgpDTBQ7Fgjg9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
