> Jonathan Underwood wrote: >> On 10/12/2007, Tom Eastep <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: >>>> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 11:29:28AM -0800, Tom Eastep wrote: >>>>> One other issue to decide; the kernel patches are cumulative -- >>>>> should >>>>> Shorewall patches also be cumulative so that distributions only have >>>>> to >>>>> apply the latest patch against the base release? >>>>> >>>> I don't have a preference one way or the other. >>> Okay - I'll wait until Jonathan weighs in then to make a decision. >> >>>From my perspective it doesn't make a huge difference either way. It's >> marginally less work to apply a singe cumulative patch. On the other >> hand, a series of fine grained patches is easier to debug if there's a >> problem. But hopefully there shouldn't be problems introduced with the >> patches. A series of fine grained patches is probably also better from >> an audit point of view... so a minor preference in that direction, but >> no strong feeling. > > I have no preference either way either; my build tools can do it either > way. So Jonathan's slight preference for fine grained patches means > we'll do it that way.
So what will be the effective change in the end? I'm RPM packaging shorewall for years and it has never been easier than it is now with the patches we get. So why change again, is it worth the effort? Simon ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ Shorewall-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel
