search for: speaks_backport

...node.net/faq.shtml#contents-userregistration> that you are encouraged to read." the link to registration instructions is dead. The new link is: http://freenode.net/kb/answer/registration Also, there is a dead link on https://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General at #22, http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html The same dead link can also be found at https://wiki.centos.org/irc at #2.0 (We heavily encourage the Socratic Method over *spoonfeeding* answers; reading how to ask questions; and understanding the upstream's statement about backporting <http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.ht...

I'm running a CentOS 3.4 box. According to yum, the OpenSSL 0.9.7a-33.15 package I have installed is the latest available. A check of the OpenSSL website shows 0.9.7g source being the latest. Is the CentOS 0.9.7a package patched to cover the same isues that the generic 0.9.7 source covers? If not, what's my recourse? Build it by hand? If I need to build it, has anybody crossed that

I want to upgrade my samba installation from 3.0.9-1.3E.3 to 3.0.20 without breaking anything along the way :) Any suggestions about order of installation? It looks like I will have to nodeps at least some of the packages. I have everything working with our AD environment so I don't want to disturb it if possible. Thanks in advance, Chuck

I would like to know why the version of openssh used in Centos4.4 is based on version 3.9p1 but not on a more recent version of openssh? The vulnerabilities found and corrected in the last version of openssh are also corrected in version 3.9? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

All, I have a CentOS 4 system I need to update OpenSSH on. Most of my experience has been on slackware and I am new to using yum and packages. I ran yum and it tells me that my current installed version is 3.9 patch level 1. It also said that there are no updates for it. I did a google for it but every link I saw that seemed to point to info about an rpm for 4.3 came up not found. Is there a

I have been asked to update OpenLDAP to the latest stable version. I am using CentOS 4.2 and have OpenLDAP 2.2.13 installed. I can install from source if I have to, but I would rather stay with rpm packages if possible. I found an rpm from Fedora Core Development on RPMFIND. Will this one work with Centos, or should I grab the source rpm and rebuild it? Bowie

...nd other information that you are encouraged to read." > > the link to registration instructions is dead. The new link is: > http://freenode.net/kb/answer/registration > > Also, there is a dead link on https://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General > at #22, http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html > > The same dead link can also be found at https://wiki.centos.org/irc at #2.0 > (We heavily encourage the Socratic Method over spoonfeeding answers; reading > how to ask questions; and understanding the upstream's statement about > backporting.) > > Alas, I couldn...

Got a question with centos/rhel php versions. because in centos 3 they're still using 4.3.2 and centos 4 which uses 4.3.9. how about the bugfixes done in 4.4 and 4.4.1? centos/rhel updates regularly like centos 3 which already updated for 6 times but still uses 4.3.2? is that mean we still suffer the bugs of the original 4.3.2? -- Regards, Mark Quitoriano, CCNA http://www.atamanetworks.com

Hello all, I am making my own distribution based on RHEL AS 3U4 (with additional rpms, like urpmi, webmin, nessus, Maildir format by default for Postfix, courier-IMAP etc.) and I would like to have information from the CentOS team. I am generating the isos of this distribution but during the launching of anaconda, the graphic interface failed to work, so the installation in text mode is the

Hi, as far as security advisories from Redhat I only see the last update to Postfix being 9/2/04 2.0.16-14.RHEL3. Centos3.3 however added a newer version that I am currently using which matches the last 2.0 version official release at postfix.org. /pub/cAos/centos-3/3.3/contrib/i386/RPMS/ postfix-2.0.20-1.centos3.1 Since I am running this as my public smtp server it makes me wonder why Redhat

hi, i want to setup DNS server on centos 5.0, and find the preinstalled version is bind.x86_64 30:9.3.3-7.el5 , and bind.x86_64 30:9.3.3-9.0.1.el5 in the updates repository. but i need to upgrade bind to version 9.3.4-P1 to prevent from any known security bugs is there any way i can do ? thanks, Bell

hi Jim Perrin, thanks for your great info as following: No, and this is not the case. The bind version provided with centos (all versions) has security fixes backported into them. Do not rely on the version numbers as a means of assuming security fixes. See http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html for details. regards, Bell

We've been going through some growing pains fumbling through porting some custom C modules that used to live under apache 1.3 into the 2.0 spec, even though none of us really considers ourselves a 'C developer'. We've basically got them all working now under the 2.0 API, and the question was posed about whether or not we should consider attempting to upgrade everything to run

Just wondering, what's the roadmap for OO to be upgraded. I have version 2.0.4 and official is already in 2.3.x and suppose in march there's going to be 2.4 version. As well as Gimp, we using 2.2 and there is 2.4.x Anyone heard upstream roadmap for upgrading? Jarmo

...are encouraged to read." > > > > the link to registration instructions is dead. The new link is: > > http://freenode.net/kb/answer/registration > > > > Also, there is a dead link on https://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General > > at #22, http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html > > > > The same dead link can also be found at https://wiki.centos.org/irc at > #2.0 > > (We heavily encourage the Socratic Method over spoonfeeding answers; > reading > > how to ask questions; and understanding the upstream's statement about > > backpo...

I'm just about to update ClamAV to v0.86 on a CentOS4 box having successfully done this on a 3.3 box but... configure: error: The installed zlib version may contain a security bug. Please upgrade to 1.2.2 or later: http://www.zlib.net. You can omit this check with --disable-zlib-vcheck but DO NOT REPORT any stability issues then! Any expected probs with me doing this update from the site - I

Hi I'm using CentOS 3, and it's fully patched using yum. Apache reports version 2.0.46 (CentOS) A colleague ran a copy of Nikto, a scripted vuln. finder, against my server, and reported the following problems. The only one I've tested is the directory traversal, and it seems to be an issue. Will the upstream vendor patch these issues in Apache 2.0.46, or not? If not, does anyone know

Pardon the newbie question, but I thought I'd check with you guys here since I couldn't find the answer to this one on CentOS web site. I installed CentOS 3.4 (needed an equivalent of RHEL 3.4 for a very specific purpose - not interested in newer releases at this point) and downloaded all available up2date stuff. However, Apache is at v2.0.46, php is at 4.3.4, and so on - which are

Hi, I'm having trouble applying ebtables-brnf-3_vs_2.4.22.diff to 2.4.22-1.2166.nptl. Applying the patch did not go well. Can anyone help me with this? TIA. Andy Here is the output: [root@specwall linux-2.4.22-1.2166.nptl]# patch -p1 < ../ebtables-brnf-3_vs_2.4.22.diff patching file net/bridge/br_private.h Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected! Assume -R? [n] n Apply anyway?

Hello list! I have been instructed to install very specific version numbers of httpd and php on the company web servers. Here's what I've tried so far [root at ec2-50-17-114-126 ~]# yum install php-5.2.17-1.w5.i386 Loaded plugins: fastestmirror Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile * addons: yum.singlehop.com * base: mirror.rackspace.com * epel: nas1.itc.virginia.edu * extras: