matthew zeier wrote:
> I find that hard to believe since google found a number of hits
> (http://tinyurl.com/2daram is a good example)
Which is in 1.1.5. I have already told you multiple times that it's
known, and will be fixed in 1.1.6. Please read my messages.
What *isn't* known is a double free bug in 2.0-pre0. As I said, I
haven't seen it, and neither has anyone else. Responding that there is
a known double-free bug in 1.1.5 is beside the point. The code in 1.1.5
is *very* different than 2.0.
> This list has so far provided the least amount of help for any open source
> tool I've ever used.
Is this the way I should behave if I file a bug in Mozilla? "Stuff
went wrong in 2.0, here's a pointer to a similar bug report in 1.5. Why
haven't you people fixed it already?"
Honestly? Is it such a shock when someone tells you that you need to
participate in the solution to a problem that only you're seeing?
> Since I'm running stock RHEL4, this should be easy to duplicate. Are you
> suggesting that if Mozilla gave you a RHEL4 system, you'd be able to fix it?
No. Maybe I can try, though.
> If that's what you're saying, send me your public key and I'll have a host
> online tonight.
http://deployingradius.com - The web site of the book
http://deployingradius.com/blog/ - The blog
List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html