On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 07:31:32PM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote:
Yeah, but in this case the patch that introduced the bug was one of
the last to go in before the release (it was the fix for PRs 20490
and 20929, the patch for that went in on April 17). So it was more
an unfortunate fix than a typical .0 bug.
Again, that's not surprising. There's always a risk that a patch can
create a new bug, and the regression test suite only proves we haven't
re-broken old bugs. Late fixes are particularly risky, because of the
limited testing they get.