2010/3/2 Adam Williamson <awill...@redhat.com>: > On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 10:57 -0500, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > >> Doesn't "just not running random/unrestricted yum update" exactly >> encode that option? > > If you're happy to live with unsecure software, certainly =) > > you can try and cherry-pick security updates, but then you get the > problem where initial release has Foobar 1.0, then Foobar 3.5 gets > shipped in updates, then a security problem emerges and Foobar 3.5-2 > with the security fix gets shipped in updates. You now have a choice of > unsecure Foobar 1.0, or completely new version Foobar 3.6.
Yes, and that will always be the case unless you are hiring a lot of developers to backport security fixes. Oh wait ... isn't that what RHEL is about? - Thomas -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
