[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bug-inetutils] release?

From: Mats Erik Andersson
Subject: Re: [bug-inetutils] release?
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 22:49:47 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

tisdag den 31 maj 2011 klockan 14:59 skrev Alfred M. Szmidt detta:
> What about a release?
> I am guessing that Mats-Erik has a bunch of changes that should be
> applied, Mats-Erik what say you?  
> And yes, I am back!  For real this time.  :-)

Two things that must be added or rejected:

1. TFTP server with IPv6; patch still pending evaluation.
   Probably I should review it myself, in order to see
   whether I disagree with myself.

2. The recent segmentation fault in syslogd __must__ be attended.
   The patch has not seen any comments. The test script is also
   of value.

Apart from deep testing of all changes that have gone into the
code basis since release 1.8, we need to make sure that any changes
are reflected in the Texinfo source. This is all to easy to forget.

Pondering on the evolution since I began following this project,
there has been important corrections to inetd, improvements to
the clients logger, ftp, traceroute, and the close to full
compatibility with BSD systems. We definitely need to study
the workaround that Guillem Jover implemented to pass the final
touch to GNU/kFreeBSD. Doing so remains a matter for those
of you fluent with GNUlib, since the interface to GNUlib

We ought to improve the test script for the TFTP server into
functionality for at least all systems we want to target.
There was a thread past Autumn related to this. Preferably
the test stub that I recently submitted for syslogd, could
also be refined to work for all our targets.

I personally would welcome a time span that would allow me to
complete the migration of syslogd towards IPv6, to provide
selective binding, and to the elimination of pre-initiated
forwarding sockets.

This very moment I could submit a patch that migrates syslogd
to use getaddrinfo(3), thus allowing a hard coded choice of
building the server or IPv4 or IPv6; no dual stacked server yet.
The patch does provide a more robust server in itself, but it
is only the beginning as I indicated in the short list.

Best regards,

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]