CentOS - Jan 2015 - CEBA-2015:0048 CentOS 6 nss-softokn BugFix Update

CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2015:0048 

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2015-0048.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) 

i386:
ed2b4fdcfa52c68f623dbb45bd44e870cdd61c72af4970951f2e59401ea353b7 
nss-softokn-3.14.3-19.el6_6.i686.rpm
4dda177cd4ebc1abf3d3d80a86c5284951f72c8815837d1292bcc69b43107b2b 
nss-softokn-devel-3.14.3-19.el6_6.i686.rpm
4a53073466214a0871dc438ec672748463d812e6b07a5137a8ca7bc489f120e2 
nss-softokn-freebl-3.14.3-19.el6_6.i686.rpm
48fc3607b0e523ca2d66de63a68e214402dcf7426cfcb4909d3bdaef778476e6 
nss-softokn-freebl-devel-3.14.3-19.el6_6.i686.rpm

x86_64:
ed2b4fdcfa52c68f623dbb45bd44e870cdd61c72af4970951f2e59401ea353b7 
nss-softokn-3.14.3-19.el6_6.i686.rpm
00f767b242bb3d14536175b669f747913fb0e98ac9cc7afd8a503dd9c19edff5 
nss-softokn-3.14.3-19.el6_6.x86_64.rpm
4dda177cd4ebc1abf3d3d80a86c5284951f72c8815837d1292bcc69b43107b2b 
nss-softokn-devel-3.14.3-19.el6_6.i686.rpm
9382425b28429e99054473d5ea61082c3ad034323a9a40414aade5835ba71913 
nss-softokn-devel-3.14.3-19.el6_6.x86_64.rpm
4a53073466214a0871dc438ec672748463d812e6b07a5137a8ca7bc489f120e2 
nss-softokn-freebl-3.14.3-19.el6_6.i686.rpm
654888987e6ea409ac7ff40d8db4811cfb065011aa6a2f7e05d38a205b4bbc1e 
nss-softokn-freebl-3.14.3-19.el6_6.x86_64.rpm
48fc3607b0e523ca2d66de63a68e214402dcf7426cfcb4909d3bdaef778476e6 
nss-softokn-freebl-devel-3.14.3-19.el6_6.i686.rpm
cf698af6bef911be1b9ca385819b18f9a8138adb9a18dacaa12bf80d31dba741 
nss-softokn-freebl-devel-3.14.3-19.el6_6.x86_64.rpm

Source:
435f36bf90abb8438ee6657350f4cdaf3e5b0bb59067066844dfd4840347bb5c 
nss-softokn-3.14.3-19.el6_6.src.rpm



-- 
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #centos at irc.freenode.net

On Jan 14 10:37pm, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
>CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2015:0048
>
>Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2015-0048.html
>
>The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
>syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
I was surprised to find that these RPMs were modified and re-released 
with different sums yet identical version strings. Is this common 
practice?

On 01/15/2015 07:15 AM, centoslistmail at gmail.com
wrote:
> On Jan 14 10:37pm, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>
>> CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2015:0048
>>
>> Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2015-0048.html
>>
>> The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
>> syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
> 
> I was surprised to find that these RPMs were modified and re-released
> with different sums yet identical version strings. Is this common practice?
No, not at all

There was what we thought was a huge problem with the packages, that
ended up being this bug:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1182337

http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2015-January/020880.html

The reason they are different was that we rebuilt and resigned the
packages in our troubleshooting of how it completely rendered yum and
rpm unusable .. then we found the cause.

But, since we found that the issue was an upstream bug (ie, centos
matches rhel and they have to fox the issue, or not fix it), we decided
to re-release.  However, I did not save the original signed packages, so
I had to resign the first ones and release them.  The only differences
between the two package sets, if you were to compare them would be the
signing data/time.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Thanks,
Johnny Hughes



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20150115/cea16d02/attachment-0001.sig>