CentOS - Mar 2005 - CentOS-4 i386 errata: Critical firefox security update

https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2005-176.html refers:

This update has been rated as having critical security impact by the
CentOS Security Response Team.

The following updated file has been uploaded and is currently syncing to
the mirrors:

firefox-1.0.1-1.4.3.centos4.1.i386.rpm

You may update you CentOS-4 i386 installations by running the command:

yum upgrade

Thanks
Johnny Hughes

On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 20:36 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2005-176.html refers:
>
> This update has been rated as having critical security impact by the
> CentOS Security Response Team.
>
> The following updated file has been uploaded and is currently syncing to
> the mirrors:
>
> firefox-1.0.1-1.4.3.centos4.1.i386.rpm
>
> You may update you CentOS-4 i386 installations by running the command:
>
> yum upgrade
----
is it typical to announce critical errata on this list?

Is this list for both CentOS-3 and CentOS-4 ?

Craig

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 19:44:07 -0700, Craig White <craigwhite@azapple.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 20:36 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> > https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2005-176.html refers:
> >
> > This update has been rated as having critical security impact by the
> > CentOS Security Response Team.
> >
> > The following updated file has been uploaded and is currently syncing
to
> > the mirrors:
> >
> > firefox-1.0.1-1.4.3.centos4.1.i386.rpm
> >
> > You may update you CentOS-4 i386 installations by running the command:
> >
> > yum upgrade
> ----
> is it typical to announce critical errata on this list?
I certainly hope so!
>
--
 Collins

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 20:36:19 -0600, Johnny Hughes
<mailing-lists@hughesjr.com> wrote:
> https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2005-176.html refers:
>
> This update has been rated as having critical security impact by the
> CentOS Security Response Team.
>
> The following updated file has been uploaded and is currently syncing to
> the mirrors:
>
> firefox-1.0.1-1.4.3.centos4.1.i386.rpm
>
> You may update you CentOS-4 i386 installations by running the command:
>
> yum upgrade
>
Doesn''t work. How long must one wait before issuing ''yum
upgrade''? A
few packages were upgraded, by firefox was not among them.

--
 Collins

It would depend on the mirror you are pulling from. Try again in a few hours
or tommorrow.

Regards

-----Original Message-----
From: centos-bounces@caosity.org [mailto:centos-bounces@caosity.org] On
Behalf Of Collins Richey
Sent: 02 March 2005 11:34
To: CentOS discussion and information list
Subject: Re: [Centos] CentOS-4 i386 errata: Critical firefox security update

Doesn''t work. How long must one wait before issuing ''yum
upgrade''? A few
packages were upgraded, by firefox was not among them.

--
 Collins
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@caosity.org
http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Collins Richey wrote:
>>
>>You may update you CentOS-4 i386 installations by running the command:
>>
>>yum upgrade
>>
>
>
> Doesn''t work. How long must one wait before issuing ''yum
upgrade''? A
> few packages were upgraded, by firefox was not among them.
Depending on the mirror that you are using - it could be from 10 minutes
to a few hours. When you say a few packages - what CentOS4 are you
running ? It might be a good idea to run through a yum upgrade if you
are running rc1.


- K

>yum upgrade
>
you don''t want to run yum upgrade, really.

you want to run yum update.


upgrade is fine for going b/t versions of a distribution but kinda silly
for updating a single pkg.

-sv

Collins Richey said:
>> is it typical to announce critical errata on this list?
>
> I certainly hope so!
Wasn''t moving the traffic the whole point of creating the -announce
list?

--
William Hooper

On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 09:27:36AM -0500, William Hooper wrote:
  >
  > Collins Richey said:
  > >> is it typical to announce critical errata on this list?
  > >
  > > I certainly hope so!
  >
  > Wasn''t moving the traffic the whole point of creating the
-announce list?

  No, the point of creating the -announce list was (or should be) that
  all of us want to see announcements and errata, but not all of us want
  to receive traffic about how to configure routing, how to make DVDs and
  what not.

  Whether or not to also post announce stuff here, doesn''t really
matter, I
  think.

  Cheers,

--
Henk van Lingen, Systems & Network Administrator              (o-      -+
Dept. of Computer Science, Utrecht University.                /\        |
phone: +31-30-2535278                                        v_/_
http://henk.vanlingen.net/             http://www.tuxtown.net/netiquette/

Henk van Lingen wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 09:27:36AM -0500, William Hooper wrote:
>  >
>  > Collins Richey said:
>  > >> is it typical to announce critical errata on this list?
>  > >
>  > > I certainly hope so!
>  >
>  > Wasn''t moving the traffic the whole point of creating the
-announce list?
>
>
>
I like for the announce stuff to be posted here. I only need to
subscribe to one list. If I want only announce, I''ll get off this one
and get on that one. No need to be on both.

John Hinton

On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, William Hooper wrote:
>
> Collins Richey said:
> >> is it typical to announce critical errata on this list?
> >
> > I certainly hope so!
>
> Wasn''t moving the traffic the whole point of creating the
-announce list?
No.

The point of the list was to allow users to have a low traffic option and
not to get the rest of the list traffic.

The new list has not been worked into our procedures yet.

Lance
--
uklinux.net -
The ISP of choice for the discerning Linux user.

Lance Davis said:
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, William Hooper wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Collins Richey said:
>>
>>>> is it typical to announce critical errata on this list?
>>>
>>> I certainly hope so!
>>>
>>
>> Wasn''t moving the traffic the whole point of creating the
-announce
>> list?
>
> No.
I guess Johnny Hughes was outvoted?

http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/2005-February/002662.html

--
William Hooper

On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, William Hooper wrote:
>
> Lance Davis said:
> > On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, William Hooper wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Collins Richey said:
> >>
> >>>> is it typical to announce critical errata on this list?
> >>>
> >>> I certainly hope so!
> >>>
> >>
> >> Wasn''t moving the traffic the whole point of creating the
-announce
> >> list?
> >
> > No.
>
> I guess Johnny Hughes was outvoted?
>
> http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/2005-February/002662.html
>
>
maybe Johnny wasnt speaking with authority ;)

Regards
Lance

--
uklinux.net -
The ISP of choice for the discerning Linux user.

How many email for a so, excuse me but I need to say it, stupid matter ?!?
Take a look from time to time to www.centos.org or distrowatch.com :-P
Think to hardly use it, deep debugging, upgrading (just compiled kde 3.4
rc1 with all composite extensions enabled on a test machine with centos
4 final :-)
Don''t you ? ^_^

Cheers,
Bruno

William Hooper ha scritto:
>I guess Johnny Hughes was outvoted?
>
>http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/2005-February/002662.html
>
>
>

On Wed, March 2, 2005 9:34 am, Lance Davis said:
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, William Hooper wrote:
>
>>
>> Lance Davis said:
>> > On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, William Hooper wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Collins Richey said:
>> >>
>> >>>> is it typical to announce critical errata on this
list?
>> >>>
>> >>> I certainly hope so!
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Wasn''t moving the traffic the whole point of creating
the -announce
>> >> list?
>> >
>> > No.
>>
>> I guess Johnny Hughes was outvoted?
>>
>> http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/2005-February/002662.html
>>
>>
> maybe Johnny wasnt speaking with authority ;)
>
> Regards
> Lance
>
> --
My e-mail says "IF" we use the announce list ... not that we are
currently
using the announce list.

No voting necessary :) ... Lance will tell me where to send it :)

--
Johnny Hughes
<http://www.HughesJR.com/>

Johnny Hughes said:
>
> My e-mail says "IF" we use the announce list ... not that we are
> currently using the announce list.
>
> No voting necessary :) ... Lance will tell me where to send it :)
It just seems wasteful to me to send announcements to this list, and the
-announce list (and in some cases the -devel list).  Rather, it makes more
sense to send it just to the announce list.

--
William Hooper

On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, William Hooper wrote:
> It just seems wasteful to me to send announcements to this list, and the
> -announce list (and in some cases the -devel list).  Rather, it makes
> more sense to send it just to the announce list.
Just as a data point ... one open source project I''m involved with has
the
general discussion list subscribed to the announce list, so that anything
sent to announce also goes to the discussion.  That way the users don''t
have to remember to be on two lists, and the developers don''t have to
remember to announce in two places.  (That announce list is of course
read-only except to a few of the lead developers.)

"JH" == John Hinton <webmaster@ew3d.com>

    JH> I like for the announce stuff to be posted here. I only
    JH> need to subscribe to one list. If I want only announce,
    JH> I''ll get off this one and get on that one. No need to be
    JH> on both.

Sweedack.  It''s pretty common to have a low-traffic announce list
that *only* gets really important announcements, but to also post
those announcements on a higher-traffic list as well.

The important thing is to have the important messages stand out in
some way (e.g., with a distinctive subject-line format) so that
they can be filtered if need be.  (Alternatively, sending such
messages to both lists would allow end users to filter for
messages sent to the announce list and treat them differently.)

   Claire

--
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
  Claire Connelly                              cmc@math.hmc.edu
  Systems Administrator                          (909) 621-8754
  Department of Mathematics                 Harvey Mudd College
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 188 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050303/725bbf3f/attachment.bin