Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 10:56:55 -0600 From: "Kevin D. Kinsey, DaleCo, S.P." <kdk@daleco.biz> To: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: latest security advisory and 5.1R Message-ID: <40460E57.7000105@daleco.biz> In-Reply-To: <20040303163040.GB32905@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <20040303082443.5804a947.ebudd@grokking.org> <20040303132914.GC11526@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <20040303090009.4d09fbbd.ebudd@grokking.org> <20040303163040.GB32905@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Seaman wrote: >On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 09:00:09AM -0500, Ed Budd wrote: > > > >>I think what's confusing me here is that I assumed that 5.1R was >>still "officially supported" and every other advisory up to this one has >>been included, like last week's FreeBSD-SA-04:03.jail advisory, for >>example. So am I to assume then that as of this week 5.1R is no longer >>"officially supported"? >> >> > > > > <snip> >You might want to ask on freebsd-security@ if 5.1-R is still a >supported security fix branch. > > Cheers, > > Matthew > > > From that list: "I intend to do so as time allows." - Jacques Vidrine HTH, Kevin Kinsey DaleCo, S.P.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40460E57.7000105>