I wouldn't consider posting the patch if there was going to be another release in a week and a half, but that usually isn't the case and a patch for an experimental module usually isn't reason enough to roll another release. Past history shows that it usually takes a serious vulnerability to warrant the turnaround we saw with 2.0.52. There have been a number of users reporting this segfault not only on the httpd email lists but on our own Novell news groups as well. We have been making a lot of progress towards stabilizing auth_ldap and util_ldap and as a result, I believe that the popularity of these modules has increased. I would really hate to put a damper on this forward progress just because we missed a segfault patch by one vote. Simply posting this patch seems like a quick and easy fix until the next release.
Brad >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tuesday, September 28, 2004 4:28:25 PM >>> At 04:59 PM 9/28/2004, Brad Nicholes wrote: > Since this patch was the last of three fixes for util_ldap and didn't >make it into 2.0.52 because of lack of votes and since it fixes a >segfault in util_ldap, now that it has the required votes, I would >suggest we backport the fix and post the patch in /dist/httpd/patches. >Any objections? No objection to backporting. Why not simply keep moving towards another release starting in a week and a half? The project as a whole is making huge progress on many fronts - the concept of release early, release often comes to mind. We fix dozens of things per week, why would this merit special placement in patches? Seems like the sort of thing contrib was made for. And if you are asking if a special build of Netware + patch in binaries is appropriate, I would vote Nay. But if you want to push for a release the day this patch is committed, that's the right of every project member. Bill
