Michael, As Daniel indicated, that version was yanked by Red Hat. The email that announced this stated: "We have retracted two bug fix advisories that affected only the S/390 architecture of Red Hat Linux 7.2. The advisory RHBA-2003:144 provided a bug fix kernel update, and RHBA-2003:143 provided a bug fix modutils update. Both advisories and the associated errata packages have been removed.
Mark - -- Mark J Cox / Red Hat Security Response Team" When we asked what was going on, we were ignored. But, that the updated kernel and kernel-source packages weren't the only ones pulled. modutils-2.4.13-0.8.1.src.rpm and modutils-2.4.13-0.8.1.s390.rpm were also yanked. Both problems appeared to be serious: "A flaw has been discovered in the kernel code handling translation lookaside buffer flushing. The flaw made it possible for a multithreaded process (with threads running on more than one processor) to fail to note that the TLB should be flushed for every processor on which the process's threads had run." and "A prior version of modutils had a bug that caused PLT relocations to be resolved incorrectly when loading a module. This bug would result in a crash when a module containing PLT relocations was loaded." It would have been nice to get some sort of answer to our questions as to why the patched versions were removed. That would have given us some indication that Red Hat has some amount of respect for others. Mark Post -----Original Message----- From: Forsee, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 12:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: kernel-source-2.4.9-43.s390.rpm N-E-1? Can anyone advise me on what happened to "kernel-source-2.4.9-43.s390.rpm"? It's referenced on the DeveloperWorks site (dated 13-May-2003) as available at http://updates.redhat.com/7.2/en/os/s390/ <http://updates.redhat.com/7.2/en/os/s390/> , however, going to that site yields "kernel-2.4.9-38.s390.rpm" and no trace of the "-43" rpm. Interestingly enough, "kernel-2.4.9-38.s390.rpm" is dated 13-Jun-2003 17:31 which, on my calendar, comes AFTER 13-May-2003. I would have guessed that "-38" would have come BEFORE "-43", but apparently not?!? Am I missing something here? OK, Am I missing a bunch 'o things here? Any help would be most appreciated. Thanks, Mike Forsee
