Hi,

On 06/08/2012 04:28 PM, Dennis Schridde wrote:
> Am Freitag, 8. Juni 2012, 12:58:53 schrieben Sie:
>> On 06/08/2012 11:27 AM, Dennis Schridde wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> The version of the package currently available in SL6 is
>>> vsftpd-2.2.2-6.el6_0.1.x86_64,

Are you sure about this? in fastbugs I see vsftpd-2.2.2-6.el6_2.1

>>> while RHEL6 apparently ships
>>> vsftpd-2.2.2-11.el6 [1].

I think that is a mis-understanding.

>>> Can you please update it, as it contains a bugfix
>>> that is important for our systems.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Dennis Schridde
>>>
>>> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708657 ("Fixed In
>>> Version")
>>
>> Please cite properly: "should be fixed in"... and the comment was made
>> this night at 03:21:47 EDT.
>>
>> What makes you believe that RH has released the fix already? What makes
>> you think it has already passed QA?
>>
>> Matthias

Sorry for my comment, I fear it was more rude that it was intended to 
be. And I admit I had not read the bugzilla entry properly...

>
> Bug #708657 comment #47 [1] mentions bug #767108 [2] which was closed in
> January. So it appeared to me as if SL was missing a fix from RHEL for 5
> months. I am sorry if I misunderstood the meaning of the bugreports.

They can be tricky at times, and I also got confused by the versions 
mentioned.

In detail:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708657 was reported against 
RHEL6.1 in May 2011, and the affected cvftpd version appears to have 
been 2.2.2-6.el6_0.1. A solution was proposed on 2011-08-31 07:29:24 
EDT. According to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767108 a 
patched rpm for 6.2 was provided by RH on 2012-01-03, the patched 
version was 2.2.2-6.el6_2.1.

>
> Regarding QA: Bug #708657 changed from ON_QA to VERIFIED in April. I assume
> that means it passed QA? Again I am sorry if I misunderstood the meaning of
> that.

708657 is confusing, but 767108 mentions the patched version that was 
released, and it is 2.2.2-6.el6_2.1, which you also find in SL fastbugs.

Hope this helps,

Matthias

>
> Kind regards,
> Dennis Schridde
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708657#c47
> [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767108