Re: Backport th/supplicant-manager-fix-ref-count-rh1298007 to 1.0?

2016-03-03 Thread Thomas Haller
On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 16:12 +0100, Thomas Haller wrote: > On Sat, 2016-02-27 at 10:06 -0600, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > Thomas, > > > > Do you think it's worth backporting th/supplicant-manager-fix-ref- > > count-rh1298007 to nm-1-0?  I was just looking at https://bugzilla. > > re > > dh > >

Re: Backport th/supplicant-manager-fix-ref-count-rh1298007 to 1.0?

2016-03-02 Thread Thomas Haller
On Sat, 2016-02-27 at 10:06 -0600, Dan Williams wrote: > Thomas, > > Do you think it's worth backporting th/supplicant-manager-fix-ref- > count-rh1298007 to nm-1-0?  I was just looking at https://bugzilla.re > dh > at.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1241198 and maybe that branch fixes the bug > there.  The

Backport th/supplicant-manager-fix-ref-count-rh1298007 to 1.0?

2016-02-27 Thread Dan Williams
Thomas, Do you think it's worth backporting th/supplicant-manager-fix-ref- count-rh1298007 to nm-1-0?  I was just looking at https://bugzilla.redh at.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1241198 and maybe that branch fixes the bug there.  The only other plausible reason would be memory corruption.  But 1.0 would