Copying @Andrew Lukoshko <[email protected]> to make sure he sees this.
On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 11:05 AM Adam Stackhouse <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Wondering if this is a better place to ask this question regarding a > kernel release for ALSA-2023:5244 > > Original question should be below as a forwarded message to save writing > it out again. > > Thanks in advance for any help regarding this and If you require anymore > info feel free to reach out. > > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Adam Stackhouse <[email protected]> > Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023, 10:13 > Subject: Question regarding ALSA-2023:5244 > To: <[email protected]> > > > Hi, > > I have noticed a slight difference with the kernel release for Alma > compared to rocky and rhel for example. I was writing to ask if this is an > expected diverge because of the recent centos repo issues or a mistake from > the auto generated errata and updateinfo for the package. > > The question is on the errata page for --> > https://errata.almalinux.org/8/ALSA-2023-5244.html > > The required kernel version is 4.18.0-477.27.2.el8_8 and this is reflected > in the updateinfo in the repo however looking to "upstream" and alteratives > like rocky you can see the same security advisory id generated from rhel is > showing the required kernel version to be --> 4.18.0-477.27.1.el8_8 > > So as you can see I am just wondering if this is a mistake in the > generated output for Alma or an expected diverge as the difference to me is > rebooting thousands of servers or not to apply security updates :D > > Sources for security advisories from rocky and rhel: > > Rhel --> https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2023:5244 > Rocky --> https://errata.rockylinux.org/RLSA-2023:5244 > > Any questions let me know > _______________________________________________ > Security mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > -- Jonathan Wright AlmaLinux Foundation Mattermost: chat <https://chat.almalinux.org/almalinux/messages/@jonathan>
