[tcpdump-workers] Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769?
msekleta at redhat.com
Mon Nov 24 10:55:15 EST 2014
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 09:22:23AM -0500, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Guy Harris <guy at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > (I'm fine with making it the Official Home if Michael chooses to do so.
> > I've managed to cope with the workflow changes required when
> > libpcap/tcpdump switched to Git, when Wireshark switched to Git, and
> > when Wireshark switched to Git+Gerrit, with the aid of some time spent
> > with a porcelain kiln, so I can probably spend a little more time
> > firing the clay and glaze, if necessary, if libpcap/tcpdump switches to
> > using GitHub. :-))
> What I'm hearing is that using git is confusing, because it allows tcpdump
> to exist on more than one person's laptop at a time.
I don't agree. Rather what are you hearing is a request that code should appear
in master branch on GitHub with reasonable time delay.
There are two options, make bpf.tcpdump.org sync with GitHub after every commit
or do development on GitHub only. Or the other way around, I don't care. But given
questionable reliability of bpf.tcpdump.org (IIRC there were numerous outages
for longer time periods in the past) I'd prefer GitHub.
I don't care what people do in their private repos, but having two "main" repos
for tcpdump/libpcap is confusing and doesn't bring any benefit whatsoever. Or am
I missing some obvious benefit of current solution.
> So I guess we should remove it from git, and go back to CVS?
> ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
> ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [
> ] mcr at sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
More information about the tcpdump-workers