Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 19:18:13 -0400 (EDT) From: erb <erb@cloud9.pain.net> To: Tim Zingelman <zingelman@fnal.gov> Cc: Jim Durham <durham@w2xo.pgh.pa.us>, alexus <ml@db.nexgen.com>, Josef Karthauser <joe@tao.org.uk>, Nuno Teixeira <nuno.mailinglists@pt-quorum.com>, <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: RELEASE 4.3 -> RELENG_4_3: SUCCESSFULLY but ... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.33.0108101917190.68297-100000@cloud9.pain.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.30.0108101446470.15733-100000@nova.fnal.gov>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
If we are referring to the topic I brought up about my newkernel script earlier, I use the RELENG_4 tag, which I believe is safe to only rebuild the kernel for. On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Tim Zingelman wrote: > On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Jim Durham wrote: > > > The tag "RELENG_4_3" means that cvsup only incorporates security > > fixes to the kernel. > > This is false. RELENG_4_3 includes critical security fixes in BOTH kernel > and userland. It is NOT always safe to only rebuild your kernel if you > are updating to RELENG_4_3. > > I cite as a reference this message from Kris Kennaway: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/freebsd-stable/message/39749 > > - Tim > > 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?Pine.BSF.4.33.0108101917190.68297-100000>