On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Sharpe, Sam J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 08:49 -0600, Daryl Herzmann wrote: > > I was puzzled to see the most recent kernel errata come out with a version > > number of "2.6.18-53.1.13" compared with the last kernel of "...6", that's > > 7 bumps for fixing 1 security issue? > > That refers to the build of the RPM, not the version of the kernel. > 2.6.18 is the Kernel version, 53.1.13 is the RPM version number. > > > When I build an RPM, I change the version every time I make an update to > the RPM, whether it fixes an issue or it fixes a fix to an issue. > > Lets say I apply a patch, so I bump the RPM version up. I then find out > that the patched binary didn't work properly, so I redo it (new > version). I then find out that fixing this broke some other thing, so I > correct that and rebuild (new version number). I then find out I forgot > to update the changelog in the .spec file, so I update that and rebuild > (new version number). > > I can quite easily believe that including one patch requires multiple > RPM rebuilds and therefore a huge number of version changes in the > RPM... which explains why it's 2.6.18-53.1.13 rather than 2.6.18-11 (I'm > making up the 11 versions, I think there's been loads more kernel RPM > releases in RHEL4.)
If you actually look at the changelog you will see exactly which fixes went in at each level from .7 through .13 ... no gaps, no holes, no oops I need to rebuild this rpm. The most interesting entry to me is the "revert to 2.6.18-53.1.6.el5" as part of .13. Perhaps this means the other intermediate fixes were removed? John _______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
