tcpdump mailing list archives
Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769?
From: Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 11:22:44 -0800
On Nov 24, 2014, at 10:25 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr () sandelman ca> wrote:
Michal Sekletar <msekleta () redhat com> wrote: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.So, it happens occasionally that developers' forget to push, and it stays on their laptop. How is this any different?
What I have on my laptop isn't official - and isn't available to anybody else. Think of it as a collection of temporary personal forks, each of which will be eliminated when I either abandon it by deleting the tree or push it to bpf.tcpdump.org. It has nothing to do with official libpcap/tcpdump. For bpf.tcpdump.org and GitHub, however, they're both publicly available; if somebody wants to know what's in the official repository, where should they look?
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,It pushes every single night: it seems that it failed to push a new branch.
New branch? The trunk on GitHub doesn't, for example, show my checkins for the CVEs in question, unless I'm missing something. That wasn't on a new branch. And changes made on GitHub - such as the changes that result from merging pull requests on GitHub - require manual pulling to get them onto bpf.tcpdump.org. _______________________________________________ tcpdump-workers mailing list tcpdump-workers () lists tcpdump org https://lists.sandelman.ca/mailman/listinfo/tcpdump-workers
Current thread:
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769?, (continued)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Romain Francoise (Nov 24)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Guy Harris (Nov 24)
- Message not available
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Romain Francoise (Nov 25)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Michal Sekletar (Nov 25)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Kishore Kumar (Nov 25)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Michal Sekletar (Nov 25)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Romain Francoise (Nov 27)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Michael Richardson (Nov 24)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Michal Sekletar (Nov 24)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Michael Richardson (Nov 24)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Guy Harris (Nov 24)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Denis Ovsienko (Nov 24)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Guy Harris (Nov 24)
- Message not available
- bpf.tcpdump.org vs github Michael Richardson (Nov 24)
- Re: bpf.tcpdump.org vs github Guy Harris (Nov 24)
- Re: bpf.tcpdump.org vs github Denis Ovsienko (Nov 25)
- Re: bpf.tcpdump.org vs github Michal Sekletar (Nov 25)
- Re: bpf.tcpdump.org vs github Michael Richardson (Nov 25)
- Re: bpf.tcpdump.org vs github Michal Sekletar (Nov 25)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Romain Francoise (Nov 24)
- Re: Official patches for CVE-2014-8767/CVE-2014-8768/CVE-2014-8769? Guy Harris (Nov 23)