Hi, > On 19 Feb 2021, at 09:02, Matthias Fischer wrote: > > Hi, > > FYI and to avoid redundancies, I got one of the 64bit-'Devels' working on: > > tar => 1.34 > bind => 9.11.28 > nettle => 3.7.1 > libgcrypt => 1.9.2 > krb5 => 1.19.1 These all sound fine :) It looks like Bind had another security issue, and Python might have one that affects us, too. > And, because it "just came my way": > rust => 1.50 (under x86-64, this is huge - about ~1.2GB sources) > > Opinions for this update(s)? Good question. I am currently working on a riscv64 port for IPFire 2, and Rust isn’t available at all for this architecture. Rust is indeed becoming such a pain to package and I do not expect any solutions to that in the near future. I assume that 1.2GB is the extracted size because the download is about 140 MB. > I'm just not so sure with the latter - do we want this? > As I see it, 'suricata' must then also be at least shipped or even updated. Yes, and since this is security relevant, I would say we should update rustc regardless of the size of the source tarball. > Besides, 'suricata 6.0.1' is still running here with the 'usleep > (5000)'-patch. So far, without - seen! - problems. Any news on this? If > wanted, I could provide a patchset so "someone" else could test this!? I don’t doubt that it will run. The question is how does it behave under high load or other more challenging constraints? I must say that I am very disappointed that the suricata devs do not really care much about a problem many people ran into. > Best, > Matthias -Michael