[Freeipa-devel] Correct xmlrpc-c version?

[Jakub Hrozek]

On 08/08/2011 06:13 PM, John Dennis wrote:
> On 08/08/2011 11:42 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 10:07 -0400, John Dennis wrote:
>>> I checked today to see if we have a new xmlrpc-c package that meets our
>>> release requirements for 2.1. I see that 1.27.4 was build earlier today
>>> for F16 and F17 with the changelog comment just saying it was upgraded
>>> to latest upstream (is that our fix?). The upstream tarball does not
>>> have a changelog :-( but there is a reference to this URL for change
>>> history:
>>>
>>> http://xmlrpc-c.sourceforge.net/change.html
>>>
>>> But not much useful information there either.
>>>
>>> Can someone tell me *exactly* what it is we're waiting for so I can be
>>> sure we've got the right release? Also it doesn't look like there has
>>> been a rebuild of F15 for a long time so even if F16 and F17 have 1.27.4
>>> and 1.27.4 is what we're looking for (is it?) then that still doesn't
>>> meet our needs because we're targeting F15 right?
>>>
>>
>> Good news is that the problem in curl package has been fixed and was
>> built for F-15:
>>
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/curl-7.21.3-9.fc15
>>
>> But we need this change to be propagated to the xmlrpc-c too. As you
>> wrote, there is already a fixed version for F-16 and F-17:
>> xmlrpc-c-1.16.24. I checked the source code, the GSSAPI delegation fix
>> should be there. We just need to ask them to release an update for F-15
>> too. Adding xmlrpc-c Fedora owner to the CC list. Enrico, can you please
>> release the package for F-15 too?
>>
>> When all this is ready, I plan to immediately send a patch& update
>> our .spec to make this work on F-15.
>
> You're talking about just the Fedora spec file right? Aren't we also
> supposed to be doing a RHEL 6.2 build and doesn't RHEL 6.2 have the same
> issues and requirements?
>

Correct - the relevant 6.2 bug is this one:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719945

The status is still ASSIGNED as of now so I think the patch has not been 
submitted to CVS yet (although Kamil referenced an upstream commit).

I've put the RHEL maintainer to CC so he can comment on the ETA of the 
RHEL fix.