segfault patch for util_ldap (was:Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS)

[Brad Nicholes <BN...@novell.com>]

   Since this patch was the last of three fixes for util_ldap and didn't
make it into 2.0.52 because of lack of votes and since it fixes a
segfault in util_ldap, now that it has the required votes, I would
suggest we backport the fix and post the patch in /dist/httpd/patches. 
Any objections?

Brad

>>> clar@apache.org Tuesday, September 28, 2004 10:20:11 AM >>>
clar        2004/09/28 09:20:11

  Modified:    .        Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH STATUS
  Log:
  added vote for ldap cache purge fix
  
  Revision  Changes    Path
  No                   revision
  No                   revision
  1.751.2.1089 +2 -2      httpd-2.0/STATUS
  
  Index: STATUS
  ===================================================================
  RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/STATUS,v
  retrieving revision 1.751.2.1088
  retrieving revision 1.751.2.1089
  diff -u -r1.751.2.1088 -r1.751.2.1089
  --- STATUS	24 Sep 2004 14:29:26 -0000	1.751.2.1088
  +++ STATUS	28 Sep 2004 16:20:10 -0000	1.751.2.1089
  @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@
   
       *) Fix a segfault in the LDAP cache purge. PR 24801
            modules/ldap/util_ldap_cache_mgr.c: 1.9, 1.10
  -       +1: minfrin, bnicholes
  +       +1: minfrin, bnicholes, clar
          bnicholes - backporting modules/ldap/util_ldap_cache_mgr.c:
r1.7 below
   	    should eliminate the need to backport the "else" condition
included
   	    in this patch.
  
  
  

Re: segfault patch for util_ldap (was:Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS)

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

At 04:59 PM 9/28/2004, Brad Nicholes wrote:
>   Since this patch was the last of three fixes for util_ldap and didn't
>make it into 2.0.52 because of lack of votes and since it fixes a
>segfault in util_ldap, now that it has the required votes, I would
>suggest we backport the fix and post the patch in /dist/httpd/patches. 
>Any objections?

No objection to backporting.  Why not simply keep moving towards another
release starting in a week and a half?  The project as a whole is
making huge progress on many fronts - the concept of release early,
release often comes to mind.

We fix dozens of things per week, why would this merit special
placement in patches?  Seems like the sort of thing contrib was
made for.

And if you are asking if a special build of Netware + patch in
binaries is appropriate, I would vote Nay.  But if you want to
push for a release the day this patch is committed, that's the
right of every project member.

Bill