Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 22:06:49 +0100 From: Michael Grimm <trashcan@odo.in-berlin.de> To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-15:02.kmem Message-ID: <8F83D101-093B-4C32-9D45-572237869768@odo.in-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: <6D500B8B-DA1F-4F66-B407-1996FE7AD2EB@odo.in-berlin.de> References: <201501271955.t0RJt8WC055452@freefall.freebsd.org> <6D500B8B-DA1F-4F66-B407-1996FE7AD2EB@odo.in-berlin.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 27.01.2015, at 22:03, Michael Grimm <trashcan@odo.in-berlin.de> = wrote: >=20 > This mail: >> FreeBSD-SA-15:02.kmem Security = Advisory >=20 > Other Mail: > | FreeBSD-SA-15:03.sctp Security = Advisory >=20 >> 3) To update your vulnerable system via a source code patch: >>=20 >> The following patches have been verified to apply to the applicable >> FreeBSD release branches. >>=20 >> a) Download the relevant patch from the location below, and verify = the >> detached PGP signature using your PGP utility. >>=20 >=20 > This mail: >> # fetch https://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/SA-15:02/sctp.patch >> # fetch https://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/SA-15:02/sctp.patch.asc >=20 > The other mail: > | # fetch https://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/SA-15:02/sctp.patch > | # fetch https://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/SA-15:02/sctp.patch.asc Grrr: | # fetch https://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/SA-15:03/sctp.patch | # fetch https://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/SA-15:03/sctp.patch.asc >=20 > Well, experienced admins will notice that both patches are distinct, > won't overwrite the first patch file downloaded with the second one, > and won't start compiling the kernel missing the first patch. >=20 > But, I do have the feeling that this naming scheme is error prone. >=20 > Just my 2 cents and with kind regards, > Michael
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8F83D101-093B-4C32-9D45-572237869768>