From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 27 13:39:52 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C16DE16A4B3 for ; Sat, 27 Sep 2003 13:39:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta4.adelphia.net (mta4.adelphia.net [68.168.78.184]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAD7744028 for ; Sat, 27 Sep 2003 13:39:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from potentialtech.com ([24.53.179.151]) by mta4.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.32 201-253-122-126-132-20030307) with ESMTP id <20030927203953.XETE17819.mta4.adelphia.net@potentialtech.com>; Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:39:53 -0400 Message-ID: <3F75F596.1080005@potentialtech.com> Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:39:50 -0400 From: Bill Moran User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030429 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matthew Seaman References: <3F746917.4070603@potentialtech.com> <20030926170241.GA2511@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20030926170241.GA2511@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Security patches and -p# X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 20:39:52 -0000 Matthew Seaman wrote: > On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 12:28:07PM -0400, Bill Moran wrote: > >>Hey, >> >>I'm a bit confused, and it may just be a typo. >> >>I recently updated a bunch of servers to patch the arp problem recently >>announced: >>ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/CERT/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-03%3A14.arp.asc >> >>Now, with the chaos in my life, plus getting physically ill during the last >>few days, I've not been 100% sure I finished the upgrade on all these >>machines, >>so I went around checking uname -a to make sure. >> >>Every single machine I upgraded says 4.8-RELEASE-p5 >> >>Now, the security advisory claims the problem is fixed in 4.8-RELEASE-p10. >> >>I know that I completely updated at least _some_ of these machines ;) >> >>Anyway. Is there a typo somewhere? Or am I misunderstanding the >>bulliten? > > It depends on how you obtained the updated source code. If you used > cvsup(1) to track the RELENG_4_8 branch, then you would have received > inter-alia patches to sys/conf/newvers.sh and other files that control > what the system says it's version number is. Well, I forgot to provide that information, but every one of these systems has been updated by cvsupping to RELENG_4_8, so I would have expected the version to update to p10. Are other people who track RELENG_4_8 seeing this? Or is just me? -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com