Re: Backport of CVE-2024-10978 fix to older pgsql versions (11, 9.6, and 9.4) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Backport of CVE-2024-10978 fix to older pgsql versions (11, 9.6, and 9.4)
Date
Msg-id Z3RUS71dsBeB17DU@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Backport of CVE-2024-10978 fix to older pgsql versions (11, 9.6, and 9.4)  (Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org>)
Responses Re: Backport of CVE-2024-10978 fix to older pgsql versions (11, 9.6, and 9.4)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 03:19:25PM -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 02:46:37PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > 
> > Good question.  In a way, if the person who made the change sees your
> > request and can answer it easily, it makes sense to ask.  However, I
> > don't know the odds of that happening.
> > 
> > I would say ask, but don't take it personally if it your request is
> > ignored.  We have fatigue about all the backpatching we have to do so it
> > is hard to get motivated enough to research EOL branches.
> > 
> That's helpful feedback.
> 
> I definitely didn't take it personally this time and won't in the future
> either.
> 
> My thinking was "ask once, bump the thread once after 2 or 3 weeks just
> in case it got lost in the noise (this is a busy list), and after that
> let the matter rest if there is no answer".

We don't normally ignore emails, so would not bother with a second
request.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Roberto C. Sánchez
Date:
Subject: Re: Backport of CVE-2024-10978 fix to older pgsql versions (11, 9.6, and 9.4)
Next
From: Larry Rosenman
Date:
Subject: Re: Strange issue with NFS mounted PGDATA on ugreen NAS