On 01/30, J. Lewis Muir wrote:
> On 01/29, Edgar Fuß wrote:
> > I've just mostly finished viewing the recording of Ilja van Sprundel's
> > "Are all BSDs created equal" 24C3 talk.
> > It looks like all the reported NetBSD bugs have been fixed (by Taylor
> > Campbell, if I recall correctly) more or
> The only thing that did not happen was issuing an SA with the details.
Plus, apart from 7.1.1, there's no formal release with the fixes.
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 12:09:17PM -0600, J. Lewis Muir wrote:
> But why would there be no pull-up?
Fixes for all the issues have been pulled up to all active branches
within a month of the original report.
The only thing that did not happen was issuing an SA with the details.
Martin
On 01/29, Edgar Fuß wrote:
> I've just mostly finished viewing the recording of Ilja van Sprundel's
> "Are all BSDs created equal" 24C3 talk.
> It looks like all the reported NetBSD bugs have been fixed (by Taylor
> Campbell, if I recall correctly) more or less overnight, however this was
> shor
On 30.01.2018 13:24, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> On 30.01.2018 13:20, Martin Husemann wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 11:17:01AM +, m...@netbsd.org wrote:
>>> So,
>>>
>>> - Didn't communicate that there's a breaking change in 7.1.1 to people
>>> building packages
>>
>> This is tech-kern and f
On 30.01.2018 13:20, Martin Husemann wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 11:17:01AM +, m...@netbsd.org wrote:
>> So,
>>
>> - Didn't communicate that there's a breaking change in 7.1.1 to people
>> building packages
>
> This is tech-kern and for those pkgsrc agnostic: what "breaking
> change in
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 11:17:01AM +, m...@netbsd.org wrote:
> So,
>
> - Didn't communicate that there's a breaking change in 7.1.1 to people
> building packages
This is tech-kern and for those pkgsrc agnostic: what "breaking
change in 7.1.1" is this?
Martin
So,
- Didn't communicate that there's a breaking change in 7.1.1 to people
building packages
- Wasn't obvious to users who incrementally update, only new.
- Once communicated, another issue: we lack resources, but don't want to
abandon the old branch. That's misplaced priorities IMO.
I guess
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 02:35:34AM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> I'm not biased towards any approach. I just note that the current
> approach with shipping binary packages and SA is inefficient and deter
> users.
Let's try to be constructive. It's true that releasing SAs is resource
consuming a
Here's a sketch of a webpage I could automagically generate with
very small changes to the CHANGES entries (or even with the existing):
https://i.imgur.com/OEiASvB.png
(Obviously can look nicer/cleaner...)
Clicking an advisory would provide you a patch of commits containing the
commit identifier,
On 29.01.2018 22:27, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 10:16:05PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> On 29.01.2018 22:01, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 09:58:16PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
Another point is to set a rule that ABI is stable between p
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 10:16:05PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> On 29.01.2018 22:01, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 09:58:16PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> >> Another point is to set a rule that ABI is stable between patch versions
> >> and binary packages (prebuilt s
On 29.01.2018 22:01, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 09:58:16PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> Another point is to set a rule that ABI is stable between patch versions
>> and binary packages (prebuilt software) still works as-is. I'm observing
>> now users who abandon researc
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 09:58:16PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> Another point is to set a rule that ABI is stable between patch versions
> and binary packages (prebuilt software) still works as-is. I'm observing
> now users who abandon researching this OS just because a patch version
> of kerbe
On 29.01.2018 20:01, m...@netbsd.org wrote:
> I think we should have a discussion to change the way netbsd releases
> and security advisories are done. they seem to be suitable for a large
> company, and netbsd is doesn't keep up with it.
>
Personally, I would find it reasonable to abandon minor
> I think we should have a discussion to change the way netbsd releases
> and security advisories are done. they seem to be suitable for a
> large company, and netbsd is doesn't keep up with it.
Actually, based on what you write below, it seems to me you're trying
to change them to be suitable fo
I think we should have a discussion to change the way netbsd releases
and security advisories are done. they seem to be suitable for a large
company, and netbsd is doesn't keep up with it.
security advisories are extremely tiresome to write, and contain a lot
of useless information. All I care is
> pullup-6 1470-1489, pullup-7 1467-1487, pullup-8 179-198
Sorry, I forgot to look for resolved tickets.
So it looks they all have been resolved instantly in -current, -6, -7 and -8,
it's also in 7.1.1, which is great, there's just no SA? Or am I completely
blind and missed the SA?
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 07:30:23PM +0100, Edgar Fu? wrote:
> I've just mostly finished viewing the recording of Ilja van Sprundel's
> "Are all BSDs created equal" 24C3 talk.
> It looks like all the reported NetBSD bugs have been fixed (by Taylor
> Campbell, if I recall correctly) more or less ove
I've just mostly finished viewing the recording of Ilja van Sprundel's
"Are all BSDs created equal" 24C3 talk.
It looks like all the reported NetBSD bugs have been fixed (by Taylor
Campbell, if I recall correctly) more or less overnight, however this was
shortly after -8 had been branched. Thoug
20 matches
Mail list logo
