On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 02:24, Philip Wyett wrote: > Yes... the more and more I look into this enterprise WS edition, the > more I get these weird Windows ME flash backs. As previously noted the > actual role call of whats in the WS edition is not too forth-coming > within the release notes. But if you look at the source rpms for AS on > any mirror and the AS errata, it's gets rather scary. The first thing I > noticed was AS 2.1 shipped with zlib 1.1.3, but there has seemingly been > no errata (security fix) update to 1.1.4. There is more stuff, but it's > pointless for me to go on listing stuff.
While the details are somewhat blurry at the moment, I think that there is enough info on the site to give a fairly clear picture of RHEL WS, and the RHEL *S 2.1 product family. We know that RHEL AS (formerly known as RHAS) shares many user land packages with RHL7.2. And we know that Red Hat's web site says RHEL WS is "fully compatible" compatible with RHEL AS, and that it contains XFree86 4.1, GNOME 1.4, and certain kernel drivers. Additionally we know that RHAS contains minor bug fixes to the RHL7.2 distro that never got released as errata, plus all the RHL7.2 errata that came out early one. So my guess is that RHEL WS shares the same kernel with the other RHEL products, which is 2.4.9-e.12, will use the same XFree86 as the other RHEL products, which is 4.1.0-44, and will use GNOME 1.4 from RHL7.3 with additional bug fixes. Additionally, I don't think that there are any known security holes in Red Hat's products. In the specific case you mention, Red Hat back ported the fix to zlib 1.1.3. See http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2002-026.html. Note that this errata does not include RHEL AS because it shipped after the errata was released, so it included the fix from day one. Hence no errata was necessary. If you see other security issues that might not have been addressed, please check the errata lists at http://rhn.redhat.com/errata, and, if they haven't been, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] While RHEL WS isn't a cutting edge product, I think that it will meet then needs of many technical workstation users, the type who have bought SGI workstations in the past. Thanks. Peter -- Phoebe-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/phoebe-list
