From owner-freebsd-security Tue Mar 12 14: 0:36 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from clink.schulte.org (clink.schulte.org [209.134.156.193]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4621837B417 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 14:00:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from schulte-laptop.nospam.schulte.org (nb-65.netbriefings.com [209.134.134.65]) by clink.schulte.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E97AC24463; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 16:00:21 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020312155431.04f93ac0@pop3s.schulte.org> X-Sender: X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 15:59:07 -0600 To: batz , Christopher Schulte From: Christopher Schulte Subject: Re: PHP 4.1.2 Cc: lewwid , freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG, Max Mouse In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020311102243.01b00c38@pop3s.schulte.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 03:31 PM 3/12/2002 -0500, batz wrote: >Though I suppose cvsup'ing the ports tree on a regular basis would >accomplish the same thing, it might be nice to do it on a security >specific basis. I don't think so. The port maintainers can upgrade their ports without much fear of breaking the rest of the base OS, unlike commits to STABLE. This is why RELENG_4_X was created. You get all the critical fixes ( mostly security at this point ) without having to worry about all the other muck in -STABLE that could possibly cause problems or change expected behavior. No need to add unnecessary complexity. The ports work quite well as is. >Cheers, > > >-- >batz -- Christopher Schulte http://www.schulte.org/ Do not un-munge my @nospam.schulte.org email address. This address is valid. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message