Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 01:14:20 -0800 From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> To: "Jerry McAllister" <jerrymc@msu.edu>, <josh.carroll@psualum.com> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Patches in FreeBSD Message-ID: <00a701c75a4f$aa8cf830$3c01a8c0@coolf89ea26645> References: <20070226184043.GA59508@gizmo.acns.msu.edu><8cb6106e0702261053k5cf8c64eod62cb2cd498bb87a@mail.gmail.com> <20070226212335.GA60165@gizmo.acns.msu.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry McAllister" <jerrymc@msu.edu> To: <josh.carroll@psualum.com> Cc: <questions@freebsd.org> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 1:23 PM Subject: Re: Patches in FreeBSD > On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 10:53:20AM -0800, Josh Carroll wrote: > > > >My question is: How do I respond to this? > > >I have seen the word patch used in security update messages - but > > >didn't follow that path. Is that real? Does it cover kernel > > >things essentially on the fly or is a 'time consuming' rebuild > > >still needed? > > > > 6.2 now official supports binary patches via freebsd-update(8). From > > the 6.2-RELEASE announcement > > (http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.2R/announce.html): > > > > "freebsd-update(8) provides officially supported binary updates for > > security fixes and errata patches" > > > > So there's your response. :) > > Thank you. > I didn't realize my question is to cutting edge - so to speak. > I saw a few posts mentioning update, but didn't take the time to > follow them and didn't realize their possible relevance. > So, good news! > No, it isn't. They will just find some other excuse to try to switch you over to Linux. The patch excuse was one of the lamest. Even in the "pre binary" patch days it didn't require the entire system to be rebuilt just to patch a daemon. Ted
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00a701c75a4f$aa8cf830$3c01a8c0>