Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 21:20:08 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: hawkeyd@visi.com Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-02:21.tcpip Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20020418211757.022614d0@nospam.lariat.org> In-Reply-To: <20020418220642.A1647@sheol.localdomain> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020418203122.0218e970@nospam.lariat.org> <4.3.2.7.2.20020418200936.023fedd0@nospam.lariat.org> <4.3.2.7.2.20020418141843.021d1540_nospam.lariat.org@ns.sol.net> <20020418182218.GA35672_peitho.fxp.org@ns.sol.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20020418141843.021d1540_nospam.lariat.org@ns.sol.net> <200204190149.g3J1nOb01496@sheol.localdomain> <4.3.2.7.2.20020418200936.023fedd0@nospam.lariat.org> <20020418212445.A1577@sheol.localdomain> <4.3.2.7.2.20020418203122.0218e970@nospam.lariat.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 09:06 PM 4/18/2002, D J Hawkey Jr wrote: >> GENERIC. > >Wouldn't cut it for some of the boxes I am or have been responsible for. >It'd boot and run, mostly, but it wouldn't "communicate". And at that point you'd quickly rebuild the kernel. >Excepting servers that can't connect to a "master box" via NFS (as has been >detailed), you can't possibly build and install a kernel inside of the ten >to twenty (max?) minutes of downtime to install an already-built kernel from >that NFS server "master". If you've got that many to do, it *is* better to create a build server. >Even were it so, you'd end up with a tuned kernel running against it's >lowest common denominator OS; that's acceptable to you? Again, you're not making sense. It wouldn't be the "lowest common denominator OS;" it'd be THE latest version of the OS. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20020418211757.022614d0>