search for: 000817

...have {CVE-2017-5753} {CVE-2017-5715} {CVE-2017-5754} fixes included. > > https://oss.oracle.com/pipermail/oraclevm-errata/2018-January/thread.html > https://oss.oracle.com/pipermail/oraclevm-errata/2018-January/000816.html > https://oss.oracle.com/pipermail/oraclevm-errata/2018-January/000817.html > > http://oss.oracle.com/oraclevm/server/3.4/SRPMS-updates/xen-4.4.4-155.0.12.el6.src.rpm > http://oss.oracle.com/oraclevm/server/3.4/SRPMS-updates/xen-4.4.4-105.0.30.el6.src.rpm That's impressive but dubious as Xen has not released any fixes for CVE-2017-5753 or CVE-2017-5715...

...like those src.rpms have {CVE-2017-5753} {CVE-2017-5715} {CVE-2017-5754} fixes included. https://oss.oracle.com/pipermail/oraclevm-errata/2018-January/thread.html https://oss.oracle.com/pipermail/oraclevm-errata/2018-January/000816.html https://oss.oracle.com/pipermail/oraclevm-errata/2018-January/000817.html http://oss.oracle.com/oraclevm/server/3.4/SRPMS-updates/xen-4.4.4-155.0.12.el6.src.rpm http://oss.oracle.com/oraclevm/server/3.4/SRPMS-updates/xen-4.4.4-105.0.30.el6.src.rpm -- Pasi > -- > Kevin Stange > Chief Technology Officer > Steadfast | Managed Infrastructure, Datacenter...

The CSS for the list archives should specify a slightly larger width for the message text. Archives for this list: <https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/> I looked up a useful reply in the archives for sharing elsewhere and found that they're nicely-formatted but the message display is a little narrow so the normal email wrapping column is wider than allowed by the archive

Hi, I am very sorry to do this on short notice, but obviously Meltdown and Spectre are a lot more than anyone was really expecting to come down the pipeline. Xen 4.4 has been EOL upstream for about a year now and I have personally been reviewing and backporting patches based on the 4.5 versions made available upstream. Given that 4.5 is now also reaching EOL, backporting to 4.4 will become

For those of you out there using export/collect (which we really need to come up with a better name for...), can you test the current SVN code? I''m mostly wondering if the performance is any better. To use it, you''ll have to remove your current database, since the database schema is significantly changed. I''m getting what looks like an additional 25% reduction