molotov
September 27th, 2004, 14:25
>>IMPORTANT:
>>BIND9 is being imported and will be in the next and likely final beta,
>>BETA7. Users of the named daemon should visit the ISC website for
>>information about migrating to BIND9.
>
>
> BETA6 still has some critical and/or serious bugs open apparently
> (according to the PR data base):
>
> 1. /bin/sh "unset" is still in violation of IEEE Std 1003.1, 2004
> edition. FIX IS AVAILABLE, bug has been open for many months, has
> persisted in BETA4 and 5.
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=standards/45738
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2004-September/037819.html
I'll defer this to the standards folks.
>
> 2. tcpdump IPv6CP segfaults are still open as of BETA5, FIX IS AVAILABLE:
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/71453
>
Looks pretty straight-forward. Anyone want to import the fix from the
tcpdump CVS tree?
4
> 3. data corruption on unaligned block access bug, kern/60313,
> is still open and unpatched AFAICS
Is this actually an issue in FreeBSD 5? In the audit trail of the PR,
Bruce Evans seems to concede that GEOM checks block alignment properly.
>
> 4. NIS is still faulty in pretending users aren't there when in fact NIS
> cannot tell if an account exists; bin/46866 is still open and unpatched
While it's a compelling argument to follow the Solaris behavior, it's
also a compelling argument to have a reasonable timeout on password lookups.
>
> 5. default inetd configuration denial of service bug, conf/33670, is still
> open and unpatched AND A LAST CHANCE TO FIX NOW
inetd is not turned on by default. What do OpenBSD and NetBSD do?
What does Linux do with xinetd?
>
> 6. (portsmgr issue) no "yes or no" or whatsoever for my inquires whether
> ports/72017 can be committed in spite of the freeze. It's a
> bugfix-only update.
>
> Please state which of these will be fixed before 5.3-RELEASE and what
> further help is needed with these.
looks like one more planned beta before we see RC1
>>BIND9 is being imported and will be in the next and likely final beta,
>>BETA7. Users of the named daemon should visit the ISC website for
>>information about migrating to BIND9.
>
>
> BETA6 still has some critical and/or serious bugs open apparently
> (according to the PR data base):
>
> 1. /bin/sh "unset" is still in violation of IEEE Std 1003.1, 2004
> edition. FIX IS AVAILABLE, bug has been open for many months, has
> persisted in BETA4 and 5.
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=standards/45738
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2004-September/037819.html
I'll defer this to the standards folks.
>
> 2. tcpdump IPv6CP segfaults are still open as of BETA5, FIX IS AVAILABLE:
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/71453
>
Looks pretty straight-forward. Anyone want to import the fix from the
tcpdump CVS tree?
4
> 3. data corruption on unaligned block access bug, kern/60313,
> is still open and unpatched AFAICS
Is this actually an issue in FreeBSD 5? In the audit trail of the PR,
Bruce Evans seems to concede that GEOM checks block alignment properly.
>
> 4. NIS is still faulty in pretending users aren't there when in fact NIS
> cannot tell if an account exists; bin/46866 is still open and unpatched
While it's a compelling argument to follow the Solaris behavior, it's
also a compelling argument to have a reasonable timeout on password lookups.
>
> 5. default inetd configuration denial of service bug, conf/33670, is still
> open and unpatched AND A LAST CHANCE TO FIX NOW
inetd is not turned on by default. What do OpenBSD and NetBSD do?
What does Linux do with xinetd?
>
> 6. (portsmgr issue) no "yes or no" or whatsoever for my inquires whether
> ports/72017 can be committed in spite of the freeze. It's a
> bugfix-only update.
>
> Please state which of these will be fixed before 5.3-RELEASE and what
> further help is needed with these.
looks like one more planned beta before we see RC1