SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL Archives

November 2007

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
Re: recent SL5 pcre security updates
From:
Troy Dawson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Troy Dawson <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 14 Nov 2007 08:51:53 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (39 lines) 
Glenn Morris wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 
> RHEL5 recently released two updates for pcre in quick succession:
> 
> https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2007-1052.html   # nov 9
> https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2007-0967pcre-devel-6.6-2.el.html   # nov 5
> 
> These were released as SL5 updates:
> 
> http://listserv.fnal.gov/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0711&L=scientific-linux-errata&T=0&P=313 # nov 6
> http://listserv.fnal.gov/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0711&L=scientific-linux-errata&T=0&P=2375 # nov 13
> 
> 
> It looks as if the same version numbers were used for the SL rpms in
> both cases (pcre-6.6-2.el5.1.i386.rpm etc), meaning that someone who
> has applied the first update won't get the second installed by an
> update.
> 
> Compared to the RHEL5 versions:
> 
> pcre-6.6-2.el5_1.1.i386.rpm 
> pcre-devel-6.6-2.el5_0.1.i386.rpm
> 
> the "_0", "_1" part of the name has been lost.
> 
> Thanks.

Thanks for pointing this out.  I'll look into this.

Troy

-- 
__________________________________________________
Troy Dawson  [log in to unmask]  (630)840-6468
Fermilab  ComputingDivision/LCSI/CSI DSS Group
__________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2