--- Danek Duvall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 08:27:50AM +0800, Chung Hang
> Christopher Chan wrote:
> 
> > The current way software on Solaris is managed, oh
> yes
> > it will need plenty of babysitting in our
> environment.
> > For example, sendmail was patched to add mysql
> table
> > support. sendmail, being the security exploit
> prone
> > piece of software that it is, gets frequent
> updates
> > that fix security holes and some of them are root
> > exploits. You can bet that any sendmail 'patch'
> for
> > Solaris 10 will break our system.
> 
> Why do you think that?  If you put your new sendmail
> bits on top of
> Solaris' sendmail bits, then yes, a patch will
> happily destroy your system.
> But (says the doctor), you shouldn't be doing that
> -- you'd put your
> version of sendmail somewhere else on the system. 
> Alternately, you could
> remove the sendmail packages first, but I don't know
> if a patch that has
> accumulated fixes to those packages would do the
> right thing when applied
> (I think so, but I'll let someone else confirm it).

Why look after two queues and two binaries when one
will handle everything?

> 
> How do apt and yum know not to overwrite your
> sendmail?

My package version trumps distro provided package.
Alternatively, I can flag the sendmail package as 'not
to be included' in automatic updates.

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to