[Olsr-dev] [PATCH] olsrd: fix stack corruption in net_output()
ZioPRoTo (Saverio Proto)
Fri Jun 22 13:04:28 CEST 2012
Henning you are missing the OpenWRT problem :)
All this discussion comes out because core developers of OLSR wants to
identify the olsrd binary running on OpenWRT to better debug.
am I correct ?
If this is correct we cannot have patches applied on olsrd source in
the OpenWRT buildroot, but we need to provide a "ready-to-use" source
to the OpenWRT package.
you are proposing of compiling the stable branch in OpenWRT ?
2012/6/22 Henning Rogge <(spam-protected)>:
> I had planned to do this discussion next week, but maybe its better to do it
> now as it appears on the list. *G*
> We need to sort out how to commit things for Olsrd and still have a good way
> to review them and then commit them to "stable" later.
> I think Saverios suggestion about splitting "pure bugfixes" and "normal
> commits" would be an advantage for the future.
> What would you think about reviving the "master" branch again? Not as a long
> term development branch, but as the place to put new commits without
> directly killing "stable"?
> We could rename the current "master" to something like "legacy-master" and
> then create a new "master" based of the current "stable" branch.
> (maybe even copying all "stale" branches like master/nhdp/olsrv2 into a
> second repository and removing them from the normal one would make sense)
> Everyone just commits to master, not directly to stable anymore.
> Every times we get a commit in "master", we can see if its a necessary
> bugfix for the current "stable", review it and later cherry-pick it over to
> When we begin with a new release, we make a temporary "release-x.x.x" branch
> from "master", which can be reviewed and tested (and will get bugfixes only
> for the next release). When we DO the release, we merge the "release-x.x.x"
> branch into "stable", tag it with "OLSRD_x_x_x" and remove the
> "release-x.x.x" branch.
> If someone works on a "long term" feature (like a completely new plugin), he
> can just add a branch of his own, similar to the PUD branch Ferry had for
> quite some time until the feature is ready to be merged to master.
> I think we are still too small as a project to put every change into a
> branch of its own, even small ones. But at least the way above would give us
> a chance to sort our mess out.
> Feedback and suggestions for improvements are welcome. (this is not
> necessarily a change we need to do tomorrow, but doing something like this
> "soon" might be a good choice)
> Henning Rogge
> On 06/22/2012 12:34 PM, Markus Kittenberger wrote:
>> imho i have no objections to have an OpenWRT package which is NOT an
>> i.e. just a version of our stable branch, but one with an correct hash,
>> maybe some sort of tag (-;
>> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 12:28 PM, ZioPRoTo (Saverio Proto) <
>> (spam-protected)> wrote:
>>>> And a real nasty and subtle one too. "Normally" the stack will be still
>>>> there, but the compiler optimizations do something clever and wreck this
>>>> crazy "optimization".
>>> Thanks to Jo for fixing the bug.
>>> So we have now a 0.6.3 with a patch applied in the OpenWRT package
>>> that again changes the binary hash.
>>> I have a proposal. Instead of keeping this patches in the OpenWRT
>>> package, we can have a git branch where we start from the latest
>>> stable tag and we cherry-pick these commits that are critical
>>> I can rewrite easily the OpenWRT Makefile to fetch the head of this
>>> new branch instead of the tarball.
>>> what do you think ?
>>> Olsr-dev mailing list
> Diplom-Informatiker Henning Rogge , Fraunhofer-Institut für
> Kommunikation, Informationsverarbeitung und Ergonomie FKIE
> Kommunikationssysteme (KOM)
> Neuenahrer Straße 20, 53343 Wachtberg, Germany
> Telefon +49 228 9435-961, Fax +49 228 9435 685
> mailto:(spam-protected) http://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de
> GPG: E1C6 0914 490B 3909 D944 F80D 4487 C67C 55EC CFE0
More information about the Olsr-dev