8 Apr
2014
8 Apr
'14
3:51 p.m.
On 04/08/2014 05:28 AM, Martin Kletzander wrote:
I wanted to back-port 736e017e as requested in Bug 1058149 [1], because it fixes a crash. However, it requires 5b3492fa and e9d09fe1 to be back-ported as well, so I wanted to confirm it's still OK when it's not a simple two-liner or similar (and combined with the low probability of the crash to happen). What's the stand on this?
Martin
Backporting all three as a series makes the most sense for me; if there's no major conflicts, then go ahead an push it to the maint branches that are impacted. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org