Release 1.1.0-pre1 TODO
I've taken some time to back-port the changes I've mentioned earlier, and I've updated the ChangeLog with everything I found in the CVS logs. http://www.freeradius.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/radiusd/doc/ChangeLog?rev=1.57.... I wonder if there's something else we wish to have in 1.1.0, or if we can plan to package the version 1.1.0-pre1 in a short time. The following list is surely very incomplete, but I tried to put together the remaining things to do. - update the new version number (1.1.0-pre1) everywhere it's needed. - update the files under the directories debian/ redhat/ and suse/ - fix configure.in for module rlm_otp: module isn't disabled when there is no libssl headers, and later the build fails. - perhaps make rlm_perl stable? I don't know the status of the version in branch 1.1 - perhaps back-port the support for "load-balance" stanza? I don't know if this implies a lot of changes, or if it's better to keep this for version 2.0 -- Nicolas Baradakis
Nicolas Baradakis <nbk@sitadelle.com> wrote:
I wonder if there's something else we wish to have in 1.1.0, or if we can plan to package the version 1.1.0-pre1 in a short time.
I don't want to make the same mistake as with the CVS head. I'd prefer monthly releases of 1.1.x with minor amounts of new features.
- update the new version number (1.1.0-pre1) everywhere it's needed. - update the files under the directories debian/ redhat/ and suse/
OK.
- fix configure.in for module rlm_otp: module isn't disabled when there is no libssl headers, and later the build fails.
Hmm... that may be a bit of work, but I'll look into it.
- perhaps make rlm_perl stable? I don't know the status of the version in branch 1.1
Revision 1.19 IIRC is stable. Let's put that into 1.1.0
- perhaps back-port the support for "load-balance" stanza? I don't know if this implies a lot of changes, or if it's better to keep this for version 2.0
It's pretty simple. I'll take a look. Alan DeKok.
"Alan DeKok" <aland@ox.org> writes:
Nicolas Baradakis <nbk@sitadelle.com> wrote:
- perhaps make rlm_perl stable? I don't know the status of the version in branch 1.1
Revision 1.19 IIRC is stable. Let's put that into 1.1.0
Yes, please do. We have been running this in production with FR 1.0.5 for a few weeks now, with a couple of million users. No major problems so far Bjørn
Frank Cusack wrote:
- fix configure.in for module rlm_otp: module isn't disabled when there is no libssl headers, and later the build fails.
I'll tackle that.
I looked at the autoconf tests for libssl in rlm_eap_tls and I wrote something similar in src/modules/rlm_otp/configure.in. It seems to work for me, please let me know if there is anything wrong. -- Nicolas Baradakis
On December 21, 2005 3:59:43 PM +0100 Nicolas Baradakis <nbk@sitadelle.com> wrote:
Frank Cusack wrote:
- fix configure.in for module rlm_otp: module isn't disabled when there is no libssl headers, and later the build fails.
I'll tackle that.
I looked at the autoconf tests for libssl in rlm_eap_tls and I wrote something similar in src/modules/rlm_otp/configure.in. It seems to work for me, please let me know if there is anything wrong.
Looks great. Sorry I wasn't able to get to it ... christmas is busy.
On December 21, 2005 7:48:15 PM -0800 Frank Cusack <fcusack@fcusack.com> wrote:
On December 21, 2005 3:59:43 PM +0100 Nicolas Baradakis <nbk@sitadelle.com> wrote:
I looked at the autoconf tests for libssl in rlm_eap_tls and I wrote something similar in src/modules/rlm_otp/configure.in. It seems to work for me, please let me know if there is anything wrong.
eh, not that it matters, but now that I think about it, I think the reason I never had that test was that I thought (perhaps incorrectly) that one of the other stable and therefore built by default modules required openssl and would fail configure for me. I think I was under the impression that the entire configure would fail, not just that module. Anyway, whatever the reason for not having done this the first time, thanks for fixing. -frank
On Wednesday 14 December 2005 23:02, Alan DeKok wrote:
Nicolas Baradakis <nbk@sitadelle.com> wrote:
- perhaps make rlm_perl stable? I don't know the status of the version in branch 1.1
Done. Untested, though.
Just tested on gentoo with perl 5.8.6 Figured out compile problem bug #301. Added an additional flags in configure to RLM_CFLAGS. Can anybody else please confirm that this is ok on different platform ? Also pulled fixes for bug #267 from the head to rlm_perl.c and example.pl -- Best Regards, Boian Jordanov SNE Orbitel - Next Generation Telecom tel. +359 2 4004 723 tel. +359 2 4004 002
participants (5)
-
Alan DeKok -
Bjørn Mork -
Boyan Jordanov -
Frank Cusack -
Nicolas Baradakis