From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Sep 20 10:22:48 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A311216A4B3
	for <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org>;
	Sat, 20 Sep 2003 10:22:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from worf.kerna.com (worf.kerna.com [194.106.143.118])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 418D343FE0
	for <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org>;
	Sat, 20 Sep 2003 10:22:47 -0700 (PDT)	(envelope-from james@kerna.ie)
Received: (qmail 94095 invoked by uid 1001); 20 Sep 2003 17:22:54 -0000
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 18:22:53 +0100
From: James Raftery <james@kerna.ie>
To: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org
Message-ID: <20030920172253.GA94049@bender.kerna.ie>
Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org
References: <200309172237.h8HMbuvK078935@freefall.freebsd.org>
	<20030918100907.GA85007@bender.kerna.ie>
	<20030918145005.GB32994@madman.celabo.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030918145005.GB32994@madman.celabo.org>
Subject: Re: [FreeBSD-Announce] FreeBSD Security Advisory
	FreeBSD-SA-03:12.openssh [REVISED]
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting]
	<freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>,
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>,
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 17:22:48 -0000

On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 09:50:06AM -0500, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:
> In this way we have three patches to distribute instead of 1 per
> release.  (Likewise, there is a single sendmail patch instead of 1 per
> release.)

I see; I hadn't considered that version.h would need a custom patch on
each branch. Updated patch strings probably aren't worth the
complication.

> You can also pull down the ancilliary patches (version.h, newvers.sh,
> UPDATING, etc) via other mechanisms (e.g. anon CVS, cvsweb) if you
> like.

Indeed - I have already done so. My scanssh output now looks a lot
healthier :)


Thanks,
james