Stephan Wiesand wrote: > Hi Troy, > > On May 14, 2010, at 18:13 , Troy Dawson wrote: > >> Hi Tom, >> The Testing email for that kernel was sent out to the general linux-users email list. It get's to more users, and it really isn't a development question, more of security update issue. >> >> Here is the information from the email >> >> --------------------------- >> >> The new kernel security update for SL5 has been built and is currently >> being tested. This is the first kernel update since Update 5 and we are >> being out usual cautious selves. > [...] > > and I think that's the right approach. What we (my site) would much rather roll out on SL5.4 systems currently is the kernel announced in SA-2010:0380 (-164.17.1.el5). Alas, once more the SRPM seems not to be available from a public place, and I guess that's why SL doesn't provide it? > > I wonder whether they (TUV) are doing this on purpose and don't want the clones to provide these packages, or it's just a flaw in their process. > > In the former case, SL probably shouldn't build and provide these kernels even if it's possible, legal, allowed by the GPL etc. > > But if it isn't intentional, we could probably find a way. > > Any insights, opinions, or ideas who to talk to? > > - Stephan > Hi Stephan, Since redhat has done the z-stream stuff, they have never released the kernels, or at least not once the z-stream was officially announced. They usually do not release any of the srpm's for the z-stream errata either, although one or two do manage to fall into the general security area's, but even that hasn't happened for a while. Since none of the z-series are available publically (as far as I know) I really wouldn't feel right rebuilding and redistributing them. Troy -- __________________________________________________ Troy Dawson [log in to unmask] (630)840-6468 Fermilab ComputingDivision/LSCS/CSI/USS Group __________________________________________________