Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 15:11:31 -0600 From: D J Hawkey Jr <hawkeyd@visi.com> To: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> Cc: security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Security fix (Fwd: sendmail 8.12.9 available Message-ID: <20030329151131.B13660@sheol.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030329144414.0786c4c8@marble.sentex.ca>; from mike@sentex.net on Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 02:45:59PM -0500 References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030329143542.037b1600@marble.sentex.ca> <5.2.0.9.0.20030329144414.0786c4c8@marble.sentex.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 29, at 02:45 PM, Mike Tancsa wrote:
>
> At 02:36 PM 29/03/2003 -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote:
>
> > From bugtraq :-(
>
> And just a few minutes later, the kind people at sendmail have mfc'd it to
> RELENG_4. Thanks!
I see that RELENG_4_6 and RELENG_4_5 got or are getting MFC'd, too.
Will there be an SA (with the customary SA patchfiles) for this? I want
to patch some RELENG_4_5 machines, rather than cvsup(1) them, because
I've patched them for SA-03:01 through SA-03:06.
cvsup(1) will revert/overwrite all those patches, right?
SA-03:04 was for sendmail, and the patchfile for RELENG_4_6 applied to
RELENG_4_5 with just a few [sic] "fuzzy lines".
I know I'm on my own in supporting RELENG_4_5, but the right tools
(a patchfile, even if for RELENG_4_6) would make the job a lot easier.
Thanks,
Dave
--
______________________ ______________________
\__________________ \ D. J. HAWKEY JR. / __________________/
\________________/\ hawkeyd@visi.com /\________________/
http://www.visi.com/~hawkeyd/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030329151131.B13660>