On Fri, 4 May 2012 16:45:51 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
> Polytropon wrote:
> >
> > First of all, thanks for explaining your point of view.
> > Allow me to add a few thoughts:
> >
> > On Fri, 4 May 2012 11:44:49 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > >
> > > Polytropon wrote:
> > > > On
Polytropon wrote:
>
> First of all, thanks for explaining your point of view.
> Allow me to add a few thoughts:
>
> On Fri, 4 May 2012 11:44:49 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
> >
> > Polytropon wrote:
> > > On Fri, 4 May 2012 04:14:05 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > > > What is require
On 4 May 2012, at 16:45, Polytropon wrote:
> On Fri, 4 May 2012 04:14:05 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
>> What is required is a differentation between the _kernel_ revision level,
>> and the patchlevel of the entire base system.
>>
>> Store the kernel revision level -in- the kernel. Use th
First of all, thanks for explaining your point of view.
Allow me to add a few thoughts:
On Fri, 4 May 2012 11:44:49 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
> Polytropon wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 May 2012 04:14:05 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > > What is required is a differentation between the _ke
On 2012-05-04 10:45, Polytropon wrote:
Allow me to extent the approach: For -STABLE versions (e. g. if
updated per CVS), those files could contain the "build number"
and the date of the currently installed -STABLE "snapshot".
A separation of a "kernel version file" and a "world version
file" is
Polytropon wrote:
> On Fri, 4 May 2012 04:14:05 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > What is required is a differentation between the _kernel_ revision level,
> > and the patchlevel of the entire base system.
> >
> > Store the kernel revision level -in- the kernel. Use the 'standard'
> > THREE
On Fri, 4 May 2012 04:14:05 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
> What is required is a differentation between the _kernel_ revision level,
> and the patchlevel of the entire base system.
>
> Store the kernel revision level -in- the kernel. Use the 'standard'
> THREE-level version numbering {Major
> From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Fri May 4 02:54:56 2012
> Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 08:52:24 +0100
> From: Matthew Seaman
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: freebsd-update not updating reported patchlevel
>
> On 03/05/2012 23:43, Robert Bonomi wrote
On 03/05/2012 22:52, Mike Brown wrote:
> For example, with this latest OpenSSL security update, running
> 'freebsd-update
> fetch' says (among other things) "The following files will be updated as part
> of updating to 8.2-RELEASE-p7" and "WARNING: FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE-p3 is
> approaching its En
On 03/05/2012 23:43, Robert Bonomi wrote:
> Amazingly, this very question was covered on this list within the last few
> hours.
It's not that much of a coincidence. We always get a rash of queries
like this every time there's a security advisory and consequently a lot
of people are updating.
Mike Brown wrote;
> I installed 8.2-RELEASE when it was new, and have been just using
> freebsd-update since then. I run freebsd-update whenever there are new
> critical patches. But for some reason, my system's reported patchlevel number
> hasn't updated since p3.
[sneck]
> But 'uname -r' c
I installed 8.2-RELEASE when it was new, and have been just using
freebsd-update since then. I run freebsd-update whenever there are new
critical patches. But for some reason, my system's reported patchlevel number
hasn't updated since p3.
For example, with this latest OpenSSL security update,
12 matches
Mail list logo
