On 27 Feb 2014, at 19:09, Warren Block <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 27 Feb 2014, Joe wrote: > >> Builds which do not have the -p suffix in their release string do not have a >> patch level. >> >> Or maybe it's more accurate to say "If your release string does not contain >> the -p suffix, your build is not from the patched security branch"? > ?? >> I'm sure you know better than I how to state this in a technically correct >> way. > > "Release strings without a -p suffix have not been patched.”
Have not yet received a Security Advisory and/or Errata Notice. A non -p system is fully patched and ready to go when it had been released, though afterwards flaws and problems can be found that were not known yet, needing it to be updated, to be able to see that, the -pX comes into play. It’s safe to assume that only -pX systems are either because of a SA or an EN. :) Remko > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-doc > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]" -- /"\ Best regards, | [email protected] \ / Remko Lodder | remko@EFnet X http://www.evilcoder.org/ | / \ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Against HTML Mail and News
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
