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