Suppose one has an ISA executable file (e.g., an application that is a
native binary executable, not an interpreted executable) that works
under a different Linux distribution -- for clarity, call that OTHER
Linux. OTHER may use a different kernel and a different glibc than SL,
and the
On 01/28/2015 11:22 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 28 January 2015 at 10:20, Yasha Karant ykar...@csusb.edu
mailto:ykar...@csusb.edu wrote:
Suppose one has an ISA executable file (e.g., an application that
is a native binary executable, not an interpreted executable) that
Not sure how that happened
Any way, they are correctly posted now (repodata still rebuilding)
Pat
On 01/28/2015 09:14 AM, Phil Wyett wrote:
On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 21:16 +, Pat Riehecky wrote:
Synopsis: Critical: glibc security update
Advisory ID: SLSA-2015:0092-1
Issue
On Wed, 2015-01-28 at 09:26 -0600, Pat Riehecky wrote:
Not sure how that happened
Any way, they are correctly posted now (repodata still rebuilding)
Pat
Hi,
A clean update. Thanks.
Regards
Phil
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Wed, 2015-01-28 at 15:41 +, Pat Riehecky wrote:
Synopsis: Important: kernel security and bug fix update
Advisory ID: SLSA-2015:0087-1
Issue Date:2015-01-27
CVE Numbers: CVE-2014-7841
CVE-2014-4656
--
* A flaw was found in the way the
On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 21:16 +, Pat Riehecky wrote:
Synopsis: Critical: glibc security update
Advisory ID: SLSA-2015:0092-1
Issue Date:2015-01-27
CVE Numbers: CVE-2015-0235
--
A heap-based buffer overflow was found in glibc's
__nss_hostname_digits_dots()
On 28 January 2015 at 10:20, Yasha Karant ykar...@csusb.edu wrote:
Suppose one has an ISA executable file (e.g., an application that is a
native binary executable, not an interpreted executable) that works under a
different Linux distribution -- for clarity, call that OTHER Linux. OTHER
may
