From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Gustavo Zacarias <gustavo@zacarias.com.ar>
Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2014 08:17:36 -0300
Subject: [Buildroot] socat version
In-Reply-To: <874mu9tmkl.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk>
References: <CANxTyt5UVteo4xOJ85YfZP4J-3ZpVstGjnr8Yj4Sry93zfUqzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <874mu9tmkl.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk>
Message-ID: <545F4D50.8080302@zacarias.com.ar>
List-Id: <buildroot.busybox.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: buildroot@busybox.net

On 11/08/2014 06:22 PM, Peter Korsgaard wrote:

> I don't think there's any real reason that we've gone with 2.0 series. I
> atleast wasn't aware of the two branches. We moved from 1.4 to 2.0 a
> long time ago (back when we used subversion), and the person doing the
> change is no longer active.
> 
> commit 3fde5702db832475c4a45aa3f35aac7839c6a710
> Author: Ulf Samuelsson <ulf.samuelsson@atmel.com>
> Date:   Fri Jan 2 08:29:31 2009 +0000
> 
>     Bump socat version, optionally add configure variables
> 
> Gustavo, you have recently bumped the version - Do you have anything to
> add?

Hi.
My bump was purely for security purposes so i kept on the same series
that was before.
Since i don't generally use socat feel free to switch to the 1.x series
if that's considered better.
Regards.