> I'd agree with Jossip though > who claimed the issue would be release-critical. The fact you render the > package unusable on heavy loaded servers sounds pretty critical, doesn't > it?
No. 1) Not just on "heavy loaded servers", but only in some setups. Not for fcgi, for example. 2) Let's me quote http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer -->8-- Severity levels ... grave makes the package in question unusable or mostly so, or causes data loss, or introduces a security hole allowing access to the accounts of users who use the package. serious is a severe violation of Debian policy (roughly, it violates a must or required directive), or, in the package maintainer's or release manager's opinion, makes the package unsuitable for release. important a bug which has a major effect on the usability of a package, without rendering it completely unusable to everyone. -->8-- I'm pretty sure that the package in current shape is not unusable (even "mostly"). So, the severity "important" seems to be more suitable. And, of course, I agreed that lowering severity ... does not make the problem disappear. > Yes, but that's not a solution either. Using fcgi is a completely > different approach which is untypical for Apache But it IS typical for high-load solutions. E.g. nginx+php-fpm. Actually, this bug can break some applications in *some* mass virtual-hosting setups with php-memcache & apache2. > and php-memcached uses a different API, right? Yep. > Well, it's not /really/ a big deal. Just replace select() by poll(). I know. Do you have a patch? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1321810629.3435.3.ca...@darkstar.msk.ru