Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 14:32:26 -0500 From: "Kevin Kinsey, DaleCo, S.P." <kdk@daleco.biz> To: "Ralph Huntington" <rjh@mohawk.net>, <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: security fixes Message-ID: <008401c22136$08d62e00$edec910c@fbccarthage.com> References: <20020701141839.V50179-100000@mohegan.mohawk.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
No one's tried on this yet, so I will. comments inline ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ralph Huntington" <rjh@mohawk.net> To: <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG> Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 1:20 PM Subject: security fixes > With all the traffic surrounding these recent vulnerabilities, it's a > little confusing to know what one has to do and need not do. Let me ask > this one question, please: > > In cvsup'ing the patched sources, if I have a 4.6-RELEASE box, should I > cvsup RELENG_4_6 and for the earlier 4.x machines cvsup RELENG_4 ??? > The more I think about the question, the tricker it gets, so I think I begin to see your point. You'd have to look at what's been committed to see for sure. I don't think that you'd break anything by doing RELENG_4_6 even on your earlier boxes, though. After all, you're going to make buildworld anyway... If you cvsup the "earlier" machines to RELENG_4, they will actually be "more up to date" than the 4.6-RELEASE box you have now, not that I'm telling you something you don't already know, I guess. > Or should they all get RELENG_4 ? > If you want them all to run -STABLE, yes. Personally, -STABLE seems pretty -STABLE right now, for me, running mail, web, database, etc. They say "you may not wish to run -STABLE on production servers" so *caveat emptor*, I guess, but I have no probs with -STABLE built last week. > Thank you, Ralph > HTH, KDK To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?008401c22136$08d62e00$edec910c>