From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Dec  8 06:21:16 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id GAA09347
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 06:21:16 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers)
Received: from fallout.campusview.indiana.edu (fallout.campusview.indiana.edu [149.159.1.1])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA09340;
          Mon, 8 Dec 1997 06:21:03 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from jfieber@indiana.edu)
Received: from localhost (jfieber@localhost)
	by fallout.campusview.indiana.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA21823;
	Mon, 8 Dec 1997 09:20:56 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 1997 09:20:55 -0500 (EST)
From: John Fieber <jfieber@indiana.edu>
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@freebsd.org>
cc: Andrew Stesin <stesin@gu.net>, freebsd-hackers@freefall.FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: F00F patch problems for 2.2.5-RELEASE (incomplete patch.) 
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971208110651.272K-100000@beast.gu.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971208090633.16632J-100000@fallout.campusview.indiana.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 8 Dec 1997, Andrew Stesin wrote:

> On Sun, 7 Dec 1997, John Fieber wrote:
> 
> > The patch in the updates directory on ftp.freebsd.org should be
> > updated.  The errata says:
> > 
> > o Intel "F00F bug" enables users to hang machines with Pentium
> >   processors if they have access to the machine and can execute programs.
> >   
> > Fix:  Update to the 2.2-stable version of the kernel or apply the
>         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 	Would you mind pointing out the breakpoint -STABLE snapshot date,
> 	please?

I don't have an answer, but checking back in the file I was
rather stunned to notice that there is NO date information for
any of the updates.  If you are applying the supplied patches,
that is probably okay, but a big problem for anyone being very
conservative and/or selective about tracking stable.  As has been
brought up recently, blindly tracking a "stable" kernel without
updating user-land utilities can bite you--I learned this from
personal experience.

A list of affected source files with version numbers would also
be very helpful, but I'll grant that could be deduced from the
diff---assuming there is one, which is not the case for the lpd
update.

Finally, a pointer to www.freebsd.org/handbook/stable.html would
be good to mention whenever suggesting that people track stable. 

-john