Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:29:55 +0200 From: Oliver Brandmueller <ob@e-Gitt.NET> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BIND update? Message-ID: <20080710102955.GA6902@e-Gitt.NET> In-Reply-To: <4875E1B6.3010407@delphij.net> References: <20080710094006.GX6902@e-Gitt.NET> <20080710094451.GS62764@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <20080710095809.GA59288@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <4875E1B6.3010407@delphij.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] Hi, On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 03:17:26AM -0700, Xin LI wrote: > Speaking as my own: Base system needs more conservative QA process, > e.g. we want to minimize the change, we need to analyst the impact > (FWIW the security fix would negatively affect heavy traffic sites) > and document it (i.e. the security advisory), and we want to make the > change a one-time one (for instance, shall we patch libc's resolver as > well?), so rushing into a "presumably patched" state would not be a > very good solution. I understand the reasons and that surely needs to be taken into account. Does that imply that the FreeBSD project got the information later than f.e. M$ or Debian, who are usually not really known for coming up too fast with such fixes? - Olli -- | Oliver Brandmueller | Offenbacher Str. 1 | Germany D-14197 Berlin | | Fon +49-172-3130856 | Fax +49-172-3145027 | WWW: http://the.addict.de/ | | Ich bin das Internet. Sowahr ich Gott helfe. | | Eine gewerbliche Nutzung aller enthaltenen Adressen ist nicht gestattet! | [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkh15KMACgkQiqtMdzjafymA3wCgqGFZnnD1fRmWsbt/K857a4WC XQgAn0wdK2PigSvDdyPUcDgiihphHBzo =0bb7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080710102955.GA6902>