similar to: when RedHat makes patches for only some versions

> On Dec 10, 2015, at 10:40 AM, Leon Fauster <leonfauster at googlemail.com> wrote: > > Am 10.12.2015 um 16:16 schrieb Noam Bernstein <noam.bernstein at nrl.navy.mil>: >> I guess this is really a RedHat, not CentOS question, but I?m hoping that someone here will be familiar enough with the upstream policy to have some useful information. >> >> How does

Am 10.12.2015 um 16:16 schrieb Noam Bernstein <noam.bernstein at nrl.navy.mil>: > I guess this is really a RedHat, not CentOS question, but I?m hoping that someone here will be familiar enough with the upstream policy to have some useful information. > > How does RedHat decide which versions to release patches for, e.g. https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2015-7613

Once upon a time, Noam Bernstein <noam.bernstein at nrl.navy.mil> said: > Of course. My only question is whether the observation that the gap for CentOS 8 is indeed larger than we have come to be used to for CentOS 7. So, I took a look... and the answer is "it's not" (with a small sample set). I took dates from Wikipedia for RHEL and the archived release notes for

> On Jan 3, 2017, at 1:24 PM, Chris Murphy <lists at colorremedies.com> wrote: > > Only Mac clients are affected? Have you tested a Linux (e.g. Fedora 25 > live OS would do) client? > > It's necessary for all files to have selinux context > system_u:object_r:samba_share_t:s0. You can either user chcon -R to > apply it recursively to a particular directory

Hi - I?d like to use the CentOS-SCL python27 packages, but those appear to be rather out of date, still on 2.7.5. Is there any chance that there will be an update in the 2.7 track, to 2.7.10? thanks, Noam ----------------------------------------------------------- Noam Bernstein Center for Materials Physics and Technology Naval Research Laboratory Code 6390 noam.bernstein at

-----Original Message----- From: CentOS [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On Behalf Of Noam Bernstein Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2017 8:54 AM To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> Subject: [CentOS] Areca RAID controller on latest CentOS 7 (1708 i.e. RHEL 7.4) kernel 3.10.0-693.2.2.el7.x86_64 > Is anyone running any Areca RAID controllers with the latest CentOS 7 kernel, >

Am 17.06.20 um 21:37 schrieb Noam Bernstein via CentOS: >> On Jun 17, 2020, at 3:32 PM, Phil Perry <pperry at elrepo.org> wrote: >> >> I get what you are saying, but what difference does it make if it has? What does it matter if the lag is 1 week, or 1 month, or more? The only reason it will matter to you is if you are trying to do something with CentOS that is time

We?ve just started to try to configure a new CentOS 7 disk server, and NFS seems OK so far, but I?m having problems with smb mounts to a Mac OS X client. I have the [homes] section as usual, and some additional shares restricted to specific users, but none seem to work. I know I?m authenticating OK (both from the smbd logs and because when I type the wrong password the Mac?s behavior is

> On Nov 15, 2017, at 11:48 AM, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > > Mark Haney wrote: >> This might be a bit OT, but I've never had to do this before and what >> I've googled doesn't seem to be working. >> >> I have an ansible playbook that I'm working on that I want to run as a >> cronjob. One task I'm having trouble with is where I have a

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2018:1318 Important Upstream details at : https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:1318 The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) x86_64: af10287508a7362f9c018b0e6c59ba7bc608260adff8bacbbd9ece097f74742b kernel-3.10.0-862.2.3.el7.x86_64.rpm

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2018:1318 Important Upstream details at : https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:1318 The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) x86_64: af10287508a7362f9c018b0e6c59ba7bc608260adff8bacbbd9ece097f74742b kernel-3.10.0-862.2.3.el7.x86_64.rpm

If the point is to access a specific web site only the remote machine can get to, you can also do it with port forwarding: ssh -L 8000:ip_of_web_site_to_access_from_remote:443 remote_machine and then locally run any browser, and access https://localhost:443 (assuming it's https. If it's plain http, use "http" and 80). Note that you'll be breaking some aspects of https

Hi, I'm currently writing my fourth book about Linux, for the french editor Eyrolles. The book will cover Linux server basics for pros, and it will be based on CentOS 7. I have a quick question to those of you who use either Windows 10 or Mac OS X as their everyday desktop system. How do you write a bootable CentOS USB disk using either Windows 10 or Mac OS X ? I've googled this, of

This might be a bit OT, but I've never had to do this before and what I've googled doesn't seem to be working. I have an ansible playbook that I'm working on that I want to run as a cronjob.? One task I'm having trouble with is where I have a text file with lines like: rd.pl "blah blah" rd.pl "blah blah blah" This text file has to be 'executed'

Given a list of rpms on one system (rpm -qa > list.txt), is there a one-shot command that I can run on another system to remove all of the rpms not listed and add any that are on the list and not present on the second system? -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com

> On Jul 28, 2015, at 18:48, Peter <peter at pajamian.dhs.org> wrote: > > On 07/29/2015 11:51 AM, Noam Bernstein wrote: >> Hi CentOS developers - I?ve been happily using CentOS for several >> years now, so thanks for all the good work. In the last week, >> however, I noticed that while the items in RHSA-2015:1443 has shown >> up as updates (and announced on

Hi CentOS developers - I?ve been happily using CentOS for several years now, so thanks for all the good work. In the last week, however, I noticed that while the items in RHSA-2015:1443 has shown up as updates (and announced on centos-announce), the analogous update for CentOS 6, RHSA-2015:1471 (according to https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2015-4620), doesn?t seem to be there. Is

Hi all - should I be surprised to be receiving these notifications today when a newer version, 3.10.0-862.3.2, corresponding to https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:1629 appears to already be available from CentOS ?yum update? Installing: kernel x86_64 3.10.0-862.3.2.el7 updates 46 M Noam

I see that this is a CentOS 7 patch only, at least so far. I also see that the CentOS 6 ssh version is 5.3 > /usr/bin/ssh -V OpenSSH_5.3p1, OpenSSL 1.0.1e-fips 11 Feb 2013 which is supposedly not affected. However, strings indicates that /usr/bin/ssh is also aware for the useroaming configuration option: > strings /usr/bin/ssh | grep -i useroam useroaming Is it actually known that the

On 6/17/20 3:53 PM, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Noam Bernstein <noam.bernstein at nrl.navy.mil> said: >> Of course. My only question is whether the observation that the gap for CentOS 8 is indeed larger than we have come to be used to for CentOS 7. > > So, I took a look... and the answer is "it's not" (with a small sample > set). I took dates