[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn commit: r1873943 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/libsvn_fs_fs/fs-fs-pack-test.c

From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 19:32:36 +0000

Joe Orton wrote on Wed, 12 Feb 2020 14:39 +00:00:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 02:28:54PM +0000, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > jorton_at_apache.org wrote on Wed, 12 Feb 2020 13:41 -0000:
> > > Author: jorton
> > > Date: Wed Feb 12 13:41:25 2020
> > > New Revision: 1873943
> > >
> > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1873943&view=rev
> > > Log:
> > > Fix test failures seen on 32-bit architectures (Fedora Raw Hide, both
> > > i686 and armv7hl) when building with GCC 10 snapshots.
> > >
> > > * subversion/tests/libsvn_fs_fs/fs-fs-pack-test.c
> > > (get_rev_contents): Avoid signed integer overflow on platforms with
> > > 32-bit long.
> >
> > Should this be backported?
>
> If there is no objection to fixing the problem this way, I can propose
> the backports, it is failing for me with 1.13.0. It looks like 1.10.x
> has the bug too - that's the only current LTS branch, right?

According to https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/subversion-dev/201908.mbox/%3Ca28e9feb-1f42-4087-81f8-2976ea50b9c4%40apache.org%3E
and https://subversion.apache.org/docs/release-notes/#supported-versions,
1.9 is still supported. However, it's 4.5 years old now, so based on
our practices when 1.9 and 1.10 were latest, users of 1.9 would only
expect security and critical bugfixes to be backported.

Cheers,

Daniel
Received on 2020-02-13 20:33:11 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.