Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-07-06 Thread Marc Espie
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 02:56:16PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > I think the easiest path here is to incorporate the new upstream into a > > port, unless someone is familiar with zlib and can cherrypick out the > > commit(s) that resolve the issue. (I didn't find zlib in ports already.) > > That

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-25 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2021-06-25, Theo Buehler wrote: > If we want to go the cherry-picking route, here's a diff that fixes the > test.csv.gz test case provided in the linked issue. No objection to this (it won't make a future sync much harder, there are already many changes in openbsd-zlib compared to the more com

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Matt Dowle
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 10:41 PM Sebastien Marie wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 08:04:37PM -0600, Matt Dowle wrote: > > > > > It is NOT 16 years old. You keep saying that. There is a different > > development > > process involved here which has upsides and downsides and which I don't > > expe

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Sebastien Marie
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 08:04:37PM -0600, Matt Dowle wrote: > > > It is NOT 16 years old. You keep saying that. There is a different > development > process involved here which has upsides and downsides and which I don't > expect > you will understand. > > That's right. I don't understand. > Co

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Theo Buehler
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 11:09:05AM -0600, Matt Dowle wrote: > Hi, > > Is it intentional or is there any good reason that OpenBSD 6.9 released May > 2021 uses a 16 year old version of zlib (v1.2.3; July 2005)? The latest > version v1.2.11 (Jan 2017) is 4 years old. > > Background here: https://gi

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Matt Dowle
> So feisty. Seriously? On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 8:33 PM Theo de Raadt wrote: > Matt Dowle wrote: > > > That's right. I don't understand. > > Could you explain it then, or point me to a document that explains what > > your development process is? > > Putting two and two together, it seems that

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Theo de Raadt
Matt Dowle wrote: > That's right. I don't understand. > Could you explain it then, or point me to a document that explains what > your development process is? > Putting two and two together, it seems that it is 16 years plus a bunch of > cherry picked bug fixes backported over a very many years.

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Matt Dowle
> I don't know either. > That is what I am asking. I'm not going to spend more time investigating a bug fix in zlib made 15 years ago. If that's what your policy is, then we have provided plentiful pointers for you to do so. > Yes, you keep saying we should just throw the new code in, and you kee

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Theo de Raadt
Matt Dowle wrote: > Theo, > > > Instead, we got pages and pages that summarize to "must > update", and doesn't explain what the bug is or what the fix is. > > > If only we had an explanation of what is actually wrong and needs fixing > > We know it was this news item from 1.2.3.1 (released 16

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Matt Dowle
Theo, > Instead, we got pages and pages that summarize to "must update", and doesn't explain what the bug is or what the fix is. > If only we had an explanation of what is actually wrong and needs fixing We know it was this news item from 1.2.3.1 (released 16 August 2006) https://zlib.net/Change

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2021-06-24, Dave Voutila wrote: > I'm in 100% agreement it sucks and it's something I believe is already > done for ports that require OpenSSL. Only for ports which require OpenSSL and don't require a library which pulls in LibreSSL. For example we are now stuck on updating Postfix (thanks to

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Theo de Raadt
Dave Voutila wrote: > Theo de Raadt writes: > > > Dave Voutila wrote: > > > >> Theo de Raadt writes: > >> > >> >> I think the easiest path here is to incorporate the new upstream into a > >> >> port, unless someone is familiar with zlib and can cherrypick out the > >> >> commit(s) that resolve

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Dave Voutila
Theo de Raadt writes: > Dave Voutila wrote: > >> Theo de Raadt writes: >> >> >> I think the easiest path here is to incorporate the new upstream into a >> >> port, unless someone is familiar with zlib and can cherrypick out the >> >> commit(s) that resolve the issue. (I didn't find zlib in port

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2021-06-24, Theo de Raadt wrote: >> I think the easiest path here is to incorporate the new upstream into a >> port, unless someone is familiar with zlib and can cherrypick out the >> commit(s) that resolve the issue. (I didn't find zlib in ports already.) > > That is completely impossible. It

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Theo de Raadt
Matt Dowle wrote: > Hi, > > Is it intentional or is there any good reason that OpenBSD 6.9 released May > 2021 uses a 16 year old version of zlib (v1.2.3; July 2005)? The latest > version v1.2.11 (Jan 2017) is 4 years old. > > Background here: https://github.com/Rdatatable/data.table/pull/5049

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Theo de Raadt
Dave Voutila wrote: > Theo de Raadt writes: > > >> I think the easiest path here is to incorporate the new upstream into a > >> port, unless someone is familiar with zlib and can cherrypick out the > >> commit(s) that resolve the issue. (I didn't find zlib in ports already.) > > > > That is comp

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Dave Voutila
Theo de Raadt writes: >> I think the easiest path here is to incorporate the new upstream into a >> port, unless someone is familiar with zlib and can cherrypick out the >> commit(s) that resolve the issue. (I didn't find zlib in ports already.) > > That is completely impossible. It must be in

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Theo de Raadt
> I think the easiest path here is to incorporate the new upstream into a > port, unless someone is familiar with zlib and can cherrypick out the > commit(s) that resolve the issue. (I didn't find zlib in ports already.) That is completely impossible. It must be in base. There are 3 copies in ba

Re: Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Dave Voutila
Matt Dowle writes: > Hi, > > Is it intentional or is there any good reason that OpenBSD 6.9 released May > 2021 uses a 16 year old version of zlib (v1.2.3; July 2005)? The latest > version v1.2.11 (Jan 2017) is 4 years old. > > Background here: https://github.com/Rdatatable/data.table/pull/5049

Why 16 year old zlib 1.2.3 in OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 please?

2021-06-24 Thread Matt Dowle
Hi, Is it intentional or is there any good reason that OpenBSD 6.9 released May 2021 uses a 16 year old version of zlib (v1.2.3; July 2005)? The latest version v1.2.11 (Jan 2017) is 4 years old. Background here: https://github.com/Rdatatable/data.table/pull/5049 Best, Matt Maintainer of data.ta