Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 07:04:42 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> To: D J Hawkey Jr <hawkeyd@visi.com> Cc: peter.lai@uconn.edu Subject: Re: 4.6-R (Was: Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-03:18.openssl) Message-ID: <20031006120442.GA77299@madman.celabo.org> In-Reply-To: <20031005171245.GA82807@sheol.localdomain> References: <200310032249.h93MnXS8047857@freefall.freebsd.org> <20031005142519.GA76750@sheol.localdomain> <20031005163252.GC399@cowbert.2y.net> <20031005171245.GA82807@sheol.localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 12:12:45PM -0500, D J Hawkey Jr wrote: > According to a HEADSUP sent out by Jacques, RELENG_4_6 was supported by > SA-03:15, and the CVS tree updated. RELENG_4_6 was also supported by > SA-03:18, but I'm not certain if its CVS tree was updated (neither the > HEADSUP nor the SA explicitly says so, but I'll bet it has been). Yes, the SA says so: Corrected: [...] 2003-10-03 20:24:59 UTC (RELENG_4_6, 4.6.2-RELEASE-p26) > I'm not sure if RELENG_4_6 is EOL'd or not (though I think it is). Having > said that, the Security team does release patches for EOL'd releases as > they see fit. No need to guess. See the table at <URL: http://www.freebsd.org/security/#adv >. > > I was expecting to be able to manually patch my 4.6 sources > > and recompile just the crypto/secure subsystems but instead I was forced to Manual patching is really only recommended for gurus. Please use CVSup and report any problems. > > upgrade to 4.8 which broke a ton of other stuff (mainly ports). Maybe I should > > have moved to RELENG_4_7 instead. RELENG_4_7 was EoL'd on September 30. Hmm, actually I think I'll extend that to October 31, considering the delay on FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE. Cheers, -- Jacques Vidrine . NTT/Verio SME . FreeBSD UNIX . Heimdal nectar@celabo.org . jvidrine@verio.net . nectar@freebsd.org . nectar@kth.se
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031006120442.GA77299>