From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
"QEMU Developers" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
"Michael Roth" <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Alexander Graf" <agraf@suse.de>,
"Anthony Liguori" <aliguori@amazon.com>,
"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Should we have a 2.0-rc3 ?
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 13:49:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140410114937.GD4038@noname.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA_HW3wKJLDJaFC=HU6pQebmnbO8N2-7gJH8FXbQszw-yg@mail.gmail.com>
Am 10.04.2014 um 13:17 hat Peter Maydell geschrieben:
> So far I know of at least three fixes which should probably
> go into 2.0:
> * my fix for the configure stack-protector checks on MacOSX
> * MST's pull request updating the ACPI test blobs
> * MST says we need to update the hex files for ACPI too
> (otherwise you get a different ACPI blob depending on whether
> your build system had iasl or not, if I understand correctly)
>
> Are there any others?
I have three fixes in my queue, though none of them is bad enough
to delay the release. However, if you're going to do an -rc3 anyway,
let me know and I'll send a pull request for them.
The bugs fixed are:
* iscsi has an error path where the return value is undefined.
* The bochs block driver has a buggy input validation check that can
cause an out-of-bounds array read with corrupt images.
> So we have two choices:
>
> (A) get those fixes into git today, and tag an rc3; that
> would then need some testing time and presumably we'd hope
> to tag it as the 2.0 release on Monday or Tuesday next week
>
> (B) say that the above are not worth fixing in 2.0 proper
> and plan to do a 2.0.1 in a few weeks with the above plus
> any other breakage that people find.
>
> Opinions?
Either way is fine with me.
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-10 11:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-10 11:17 [Qemu-devel] Should we have a 2.0-rc3 ? Peter Maydell
2014-04-10 11:24 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-10 15:22 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-04-10 11:49 ` Kevin Wolf [this message]
2014-04-10 12:44 ` Eric Blake
2014-04-10 12:46 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-10 12:51 ` Eric Blake
2014-04-10 12:56 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-10 13:41 ` Ján Tomko
2014-04-10 13:45 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-10 15:02 ` Eric Blake
2014-04-10 15:27 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-10 15:38 ` Eric Blake
2014-04-10 15:42 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-11 8:01 ` Markus Armbruster
2014-04-11 8:37 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2014-04-10 15:26 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-04-10 18:55 ` Cole Robinson
2014-04-10 21:30 ` Peter Maydell
2014-04-11 17:37 ` Peter Maydell
2014-04-11 22:55 ` Alexander Graf
2014-04-12 1:49 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-04-12 8:48 ` Michael Tokarev
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140410114937.GD4038@noname.redhat.com \
--to=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=afaerber@suse.de \
--cc=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=aliguori@amazon.com \
--cc=mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).