- Original Message -
From: "Jerry McAllister" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 1:23 PM
Subject: Re: Patches in FreeBSD
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 10:53:20AM -0800, Josh Carroll wrote:
&g
Josh Carroll wrote:
and you can update your third party packages via binary packages
(which you can get from freebsd.org or build yourself)...so it seems
these two solutions would be a great fit.
Right, using packages instead of ports means he can do binary updates
of packages as well, without
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 02:11:48PM -0600, Dan Nelson wrote:
> In the last episode (Feb 26), Jerry said:
> > I am being forced to use something besides FreeBSD - probably Susie
> > or Red Hat Linux for the base of a server system. The primary reason
> > given is that when security issues come alon
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 10:53:20AM -0800, Josh Carroll wrote:
> >My question is: How do I respond to this?
> >I have seen the word patch used in security update messages - but
> >didn't follow that path. Is that real? Does it cover kernel
> >things essentially on the fly or is a 'time consum
In the last episode (Feb 26), Jerry said:
> I am being forced to use something besides FreeBSD - probably Susie
> or Red Hat Linux for the base of a server system. The primary reason
> given is that when security issues come along, FreeBSD has no way of
> patching the running system, but rather re
and you can update your third party packages via binary packages
(which you can get from freebsd.org or build yourself)...so it seems
these two solutions would be a great fit.
Right, using packages instead of ports means he can do binary updates
of packages as well, without having to recompile t
On 2/26/07, Josh Carroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My question is: How do I respond to this?
> I have seen the word patch used in security update messages - but
> didn't follow that path. Is that real? Does it cover kernel
> things essentially on the fly or is a 'time consuming' rebuild
My question is: How do I respond to this?
I have seen the word patch used in security update messages - but
didn't follow that path. Is that real? Does it cover kernel
things essentially on the fly or is a 'time consuming' rebuild
still needed?
6.2 now official supports binary patches via
ed in security update messages - but
didn't follow that path. Is that real? Does it cover kernel
things essentially on the fly or is a 'time consuming' rebuild
still needed?
I will look up some stuff on patches in FreeBSD, but would like to
hear some perspective on this.
