in
security-updates but they had not been automatically upgraded. Manually
installing the newer versions of those had no problems.
I would like to find out if I have more packages which would have a
newer version available but haven't been upgraded.
I'm using Debian etch AMD64.
Simo
--
:r ~/.signature
and php4-mysql had a newer version in
security-updates but they had not been automatically upgraded. Manually
installing the newer versions of those had no problems.
I would like to find out if I have more packages which would have a
newer version available but haven't been upgraded.
I'm using
On Sun, Sep 18, 2005 at 12:26:31PM +0300, Simo Kauppi wrote:
I would like to find out if I have more packages which would have a
newer version available but haven't been upgraded.
Run apt-get update apt-get upgrade. [Or dist-upgrade instead of
upgrade or aptitude instead of apt-get, but those
just accidentally noticed that
php4-common, libapache2-mod-php4 and php4-mysql had a newer version in
security-updates but they had not been automatically upgraded. Manually
installing the newer versions of those had no problems.
I would like to find out if I have more packages which would
On Sun, Sep 18, 2005 at 02:43:09PM +0200, Maurits van Rees wrote:
On Sun, Sep 18, 2005 at 12:26:31PM +0300, Simo Kauppi wrote:
I would like to find out if I have more packages which would have a
newer version available but haven't been upgraded.
Run apt-get update apt-get upgrade. [Or
[Please include my email address in any replies.]
Hi Bob,
Thanks for your quick reply.
I would verify that you are really at Sarge already and that these
really are only security updates. As things download you can tell if
they are coming from sarge/updates or not. If you pick a package
releases critical updates to the stable release
which are can include upgrades not specifically security updates but
mostly upgrades the released stable image with the currently active
set of security upgrades. Here is the last one for the oldstable
woody release
http://lists.debian.org/debian
[Please include my email address in any replies]
Hi Bob,
You want apt-get upgrade. (Or aptitude upgrade.)
Great! I need 500MB of packages, going to leave it running over night :)
Thanks for all the help.
Kind regards
JG
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
along and so may not have a good idea of
the entire set size. But I am worried that you are really running
Woody and this upgrade is the amount of data while you are now
pointing to Sarge.
I would verify that you are really at Sarge already and that these
really are only security updates
[Please include my email address in any replies]
Hi,
Presently using debian sarge, I would like to update my system with only
security fixes which have been made available since Sarge was released.
Now sure how to do this.
would apt-get upgrade also update non-security fixed packages?
I have
On 11-sep-2005, at 18:29, J. Grant wrote:
[Please include my email address in any replies]
Hi,
Presently using debian sarge, I would like to update my system with
only
security fixes which have been made available since Sarge was
released.
Now sure how to do this.
would apt-get upgrade
On Sunday, 11.09.2005 at 20:11 +0200, oneman wrote:
Not sure what the difference is between apt-get upgrade and apt-get
dist-upgrade
Try man apt-get. In short: dist-upgrade is better at resolving
dependency conflicts. BTW, Aptitude doesn't (need to) have two ways
of upgrading, it's
' for upgrade select the
section upgradable packages, hit '+' to select all the packages for
upgrades and 2x 'G'. When aptitude confronts you with questions, use
common sense. That's it.
Security updates are carried under the header 'Security updates' rather
than 'Upgradable packages'. If you have
On 8/18/05, Jonathan Kaye [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or do you make a custom
launcher that directly runs the version in /opt (which would be less
than ideal for a multiuser system)?
I don't follow you here. Why would it be less than ideal?
It would be less than ideal because then each user
En/La [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha escrit, a 18/08/05 09:49:
On 8/18/05, Jonathan Kaye [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or do you make a custom
launcher that directly runs the version in /opt (which would be less
than ideal for a multiuser system)?
snip
Hey, don't get me wrong, I *love* Debian, and it's
On 2005-08-17 23:17:01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's it? What about setting it up so that simply running firefox
from anywhere executes the version installed in /opt/firefox? Do you
make a link in /usr/bin, overwriting the file there,
[...]
You should never touch /usr/bin or you may
. In the meantime, are we Testing users supposed to keep using a
vulnerable version of Firefox?
I know Testing is not supported for security updates, but for
high-profile packages like Firefox with high-profile vulns, don't we
need a solution for this problem? And upgrading to Unstable
of libc6 will get into Testing? It may be a very long
time. In the meantime, are we Testing users supposed to keep using a
vulnerable version of Firefox?
I know Testing is not supported for security updates, but for
high-profile packages like Firefox with high-profile vulns, don't we
need
no problem installing
the plain tarball from mozilla.org.
I know Testing is not supported for security updates, but for
high-profile packages like Firefox with high-profile vulns, don't we
need a solution for this problem? And upgrading to Unstable is not a
solution; there's a reason I and others
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 01:01:20AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now, I'm far from an expert, and I'm still fairly new to Debian (less
than a year), but it seems like something needs to change. I don't
want to run Unstable on my computer, but I don't want to be stuck with
vulnerable
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 01:01:20AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I could upgrade Firefox to the version that's in unstable, but there
are two problems:
If a package in testing is the same version as in stable, the security
updates ought to work for it. Try adding security.debian.org to your
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 10:54:57AM +0100, Peter J Ross wrote:
If a package in testing is the same version as in stable, the security
updates ought to work for it ...
... right up until there are major library changes in Unstable. Such
changes are happening now. Once that happens
En/La [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha escrit, a 17/08/05 08:01:
I'm a happy user of Testing, but I'm a bit concerned about getting
updates to Firefox in a timely manner. The current version in Testing
is 1.0.4-2, which has recently-announced vulnerabilities in it. The
vulns (I don't like typing that
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 06:15:18AM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 10:54:57AM +0100, Peter J Ross wrote:
If a package in testing is the same version as in stable, the security
updates ought to work for it ...
... right up until there are major library changes in Unstable
, but Testing is still
on libc6 2.3.2.
Yes, you need to install all the dependencies. Otherwise, you should
either install the package from the (stable) security updates (with
the corresponding dependencies) or install the program from upstream.
Getting the source package and recompile it to avoid dynamical
On 2005-08-17 09:34:02 +0200, Maurits van Rees wrote:
Yes. But you may want to search the archives of the debian-user and
debian-devel mailing lists of the past few weeks, as there have been
discussions about this subject. I have hardly read it all, but I
think there were people running
On 2005-08-17 13:06:09 +0200, Jonathan Kaye wrote:
Another way to go is to not wait for debian packages. I go directly
to the firefox, thunderbird, openoffice, etc. and download the
latest releases. I'm running Firefox 1.0.6 on testing (2.6.8-2) with
zero problems. Same for TB 1.0.6 and OO
when the
new version of libc6 will get into Testing? It may be a very long
time. In the meantime, are we Testing users supposed to keep using a
vulnerable version of Firefox?
I know Testing is not supported for security updates, but for
high-profile packages like Firefox with high-profile
En/La Vincent Lefevre ha escrit, a 17/08/05 13:27:
On 2005-08-17 13:06:09 +0200, Jonathan Kaye wrote:
Another way to go is to not wait for debian packages. I go directly
to the firefox, thunderbird, openoffice, etc. and download the
latest releases. I'm running Firefox 1.0.6 on testing
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 03:31:30PM +0200, Jonathan Kaye wrote:
Not exactly. There are builds for Solaris and Mac OS X and maybe some
others as well. I didn't get what platform the OP was using so it
seemed a reasonable alternative to suggest.
Frankly, it's the only option, unfortunately.
On 2005-08-17 15:31:30 +0200, Jonathan Kaye wrote:
En/La Vincent Lefevre ha escrit, a 17/08/05 13:27:
But you need to recompile firefox if you don't have an x86 architecture.
Hi Vincent,
Not exactly. There are builds for Solaris and Mac OS X and maybe some
others as well. I didn't get
On 8/17/05, Peter J Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If a package in testing is the same version as in stable, the security
updates ought to work for it. Try adding security.debian.org to your
sources.list and see what happens.
Thanks; I meant to do that last night, but I forgot after I wrote
On 8/17/05, Vincent Lefevre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You should look at the package developer page:
http://packages.qa.debian.org/m/mozilla-firefox.html
There you have: The package has not yet entered testing even though
the 0-day delay is over. Check why. and by clicking on Check why,
On 8/17/05, Jonathan Kaye [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another way to go is to not wait for debian packages. I go directly to
the firefox, thunderbird, openoffice, etc. and download the latest
releases. I'm running Firefox 1.0.6 on testing (2.6.8-2) with zero
problems. Same for TB 1.0.6 and OO
I just found something very strange (to me, anyway). I ran Firefox
from the Mozilla installer. Then I clicked on a link in Thunderbird,
which caused the Debian version to run. But instead of launching a
separate window, the link opened in the existing window. But after
doing that, when I went
Well, sorry for posting so many times to this thread; I've learned
some stuff and thought about a lot.
I ended up running apt-get -t unstable install mozilla-firefox.
That upgraded a lot of stuff, including a bunch of Gnome libs, and
also packages like gnome-panel-data to their 2.10 versions,
En/La [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha escrit, a 18/08/05 06:17:
On 8/17/05, Jonathan Kaye [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
That's it? What about setting it up so that simply running firefox
from anywhere executes the version installed in /opt/firefox? Do you
make a link in /usr/bin, overwriting the file
I have a system which has the following in /etc/apt/sources.list:
deb http://security.debian.org/ sarge/updates main contrib non-free
It works fine.
However, am I correct to assume that the contrib and non-free
directories are superfluous in this case and can or ought to be
removed?
I mount
Hi,
what's the security policy of Debian testing?
for several reasons, I must use Debian Testing on a public server and Awstats
has not been upgraded:
http://seclists.org/lists/bugtraq/2005/Aug/0134.html
Should I ask to the package maintainer?
Should I make My own package, waiting fot it?
--
Rakotomandimby (R12y) Mihamina:
what's the security policy of Debian testing?
Generally, security updates will propagate through unstable just like
any other update. Since the release of sarge (or a short time before
that), there is also a repository with security updates for testing
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 04:51:18PM +0200, Hannes Mayer wrote:
I've been wondering the past few days why there are no updates via
apt-get update/upgrade (I have the correct entries in
sources.list!). A few days ago I was reading at heise.de
(http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/61076) that
Hi all!
I've been wondering the past few days why there are no updates via
apt-get update/upgrade (I have the correct entries in
sources.list!). A few days ago I was reading at heise.de
(http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/61076) that the security team
seems to have disappeared. In a previous
Hannes Mayer wrote:
I've been wondering the past few days why there are no updates via
apt-get update/upgrade (I have the correct entries in
sources.list!). A few days ago I was reading at heise.de
(http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/61076) that the security team
seems to have disappeared.
On 6/29/05, Philip Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
There's been some discussion about this subject on the Debian Security
mailing list:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-security/2005/06/threads.html#00142
Duhh.. the sec list... thanks for the reminder and the link Phil!
Best regards,
CNET News.com (http://www.news.com/)
This story has been sent to you on behalf of debian-user@lists.debian.org
(e-mail address not verified).
Debian drops ball on security updates
By Renai LeMay
The newly launched Linux distribution has a glitch--some versions were released
with default
Hello *,
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 06:53:10AM -0700, debian-user@lists.debian.org wrote:
CNET News.com (http://www.news.com/)
This story has been sent to you on behalf of debian-user@lists.debian.org
(e-mail address not verified).
Ah ha, great joke.
Debian drops ball on security updates
://www.news.com/)
This story has been sent to you on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(e-mail address not verified).
Ah ha, great joke.
Debian drops ball on security updates
By Renai LeMay
=20
The newly launched Linux distribution has a glitch--some versions were re=
leased with default security
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 06:53:10AM -0700, debian-user@lists.debian.org wrote:
CNET News.com (http://www.news.com/)
This story has been sent to you on behalf of debian-user@lists.debian.org
(e-mail address not verified).
Debian drops ball on security updates
By Renai LeMay
The newly launched
Olá,
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 11:06:38PM -0200, Marcos Vinicius Lazarini wrote:
A ideia do André de fazer mirror é interessante, mas em geral não tenho
tanto espaco assim sobrando... Qual seria o tamanho de um mirror completo
x86? 5 Gb?
Mirror do stable para a arquitetura i386 (x86) : 8.7GB
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 03:08:32AM -0200, Uirá wrote:
Olá pessoal.
Olá,
Seguinte,
Eu trabalho no Ministério da Cultura, e nós estamos começando a
planejar a migração de nossos desktops (todos eles) para
softwarelivre. Inicialmente, a distro utilizada será a Debian BR-CDD
pre4, que está
Olá pessoal.
Seguinte,
Eu trabalho no Ministério da Cultura, e nós estamos começando a
planejar a migração de nossos desktops (todos eles) para
softwarelivre. Inicialmente, a distro utilizada será a Debian BR-CDD
pre4, que está muito legal por sinal.
---
Para o processo de migração, estamos
i configured my apt sources.list by apt-setup and i said yes to the questions
about a securityy source but when i run apt-get update it says that the site
isn't there
what is the line to put in my sources.list file???
i'm running unstable
--
Rui Silva
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU/Linux
--
Rui Silva wrote:
i configured my apt sources.list by apt-setup and i said yes to the questions
about a securityy source but when i run apt-get update it says that the site
isn't there
what is the line to put in my sources.list file???
i'm running unstable
There are no security updates
Incoming from Rui Silva:
i configured my apt sources.list by apt-setup and i said yes to the questions
about a securityy source but when i run apt-get update it says that the site
isn't there
what is the line to put in my sources.list file???
i'm running unstable
I run stable. Massage
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:21:39 +, Rui Silva [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i configured my apt sources.list by apt-setup and i said yes to the questions
about a securityy source but when i run apt-get update it says that the site
isn't there
what is the line to put in my sources.list file???
Michelle Konzack schrieb:
Dann guck mal auf
http://security.debian.org/
oder
ftp://ftp.de.debian.org/debian-security/dists/sarge/updates/
Ich habe mal geguckt in
ftp://ftp.de.debian.org/debian-security/dists/sarge/updates/main/binary-i386/Packages
Version: 2.2.5-9.woody.3
Version:
Rüdiger Noack wrote:
Ich habe mal geguckt in
ftp://ftp.de.debian.org/debian-security/dists/sarge/updates/main/binary-i386/Packages
...
Version: 1.4.3-2woody1
Was nutzt mir also eine libc6-2.2.5-9.woody.3 für sarge?
Warum diese Packete dort liegen, ist mir allerdings schleierhaft.
Vieleicht
Am 2004-09-07 10:33:28, schrieb Patrick Cornelißen:
Vieleicht einfach, damit die Paketlisten nicht leer sind um Side-effects
zu verhindern. Da die aktuellen Sarge Installer schon versuchen auf die
repositories zuzugreifen.
Mir sagte jemand, das wenn man von WOODY auf SARGE upgraded
es als
The recent 2.4.27 kernel fixed a few security issues
(http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/ChangeLog-2.4.27). Does
anyone know if these affect the current Woody kernel packages and if so
when security updates are likely to be released?
Thanks,
Phil
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
On Thu, Aug 19 at 11:49AM -0400, Nori Heikkinen wrote:
on Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:14:01AM +0800, John Summerfield insinuated:
Nori Heikkinen wrote:
reading the debian weekly news, i noticed a couple packages that i
have installed with newly-discovered security holes in them. the
newsletter
On Thu, Aug 19 at 11:49AM -0400, Nori Heikkinen wrote:
right, but i can't do that. the rest of my message went on to
say that when i try to apt-get upgrade (i've already
apt-gotten updated), because i haven't done it in so long, apt
tries to upgrade 500+ packagest for me, which i don't have
on Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:22:28AM +0200, Florian Ernst insinuated:
Hello!
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 02:30:50PM -0400, Nori Heikkinen wrote:
okay, i get it! i didn't understand how this would help until i
tried it -- what i had been not getting was that apt-get
installing a package that i
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 11:49:41AM -0400, Nori Heikkinen wrote:
on Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:14:01AM +0800, John Summerfield insinuated:
Nori Heikkinen wrote:
reading the debian weekly news, i noticed a couple packages that i
have installed with newly-discovered security holes in them. the
on Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:01:14AM -0500, David insinuated:
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 11:49:41AM -0400, Nori Heikkinen wrote:
on Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:14:01AM +0800, John Summerfield insinuated:
Nori Heikkinen wrote:
reading the debian weekly news, i noticed a couple packages
that i have
Hello again!
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 10:48:09AM -0400, Nori Heikkinen wrote:
my patch is below -- what do you think?
[...]
paraThis is also the target to use if you want to upgrade a one
^^
or more already-installed
on Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:20:21PM +0200, Florian Ernst insinuated:
Hello again!
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 10:48:09AM -0400, Nori Heikkinen wrote:
my patch is below -- what do you think?
[...]
paraThis is also the target to use if you want to upgrade a one
Hello again!
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 02:10:54PM -0400, Nori Heikkinen wrote:
i followed your instructions submitted a patch, [...]
Looking good, thanks for your contribution. One last remark for future
reference: rather copy the original stuff to something like .orig and
work on the real files
on Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:56:18PM +0200, Florian Ernst insinuated:
Hello again!
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 02:10:54PM -0400, Nori Heikkinen wrote:
i followed your instructions submitted a patch, [...]
Looking good, thanks for your contribution.
glad to help out!
One last remark for
future
on Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:14:01AM +0800, John Summerfield insinuated:
Nori Heikkinen wrote:
hey,
reading the debian weekly news, i noticed a couple packages that i
have installed with newly-discovered security holes in them. the
newsletter says about these packages you know the drill.
On Thu, 2004-08-19 at 11:49, Nori Heikkinen wrote:
[...]
right, but i can't do that. the rest of my message went on to say
that when i try to apt-get upgrade (i've already apt-gotten updated),
because i haven't done it in so long, apt tries to upgrade 500+
packagest for me, which i don't
on Thu, 19 Aug 2004 01:36:34PM -0400, Greg Folkert insinuated:
On Thu, 2004-08-19 at 11:49, Nori Heikkinen wrote:
[...]
right, but i can't do that. the rest of my message went on to say
that when i try to apt-get upgrade (i've already apt-gotten updated),
because i haven't done it in
Hello!
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 02:30:50PM -0400, Nori Heikkinen wrote:
okay, i get it! i didn't understand how this would help until i tried
it -- what i had been not getting was that apt-get installing a
package that i already had installed would upgrade it if it needed to
be upgraded. i
hey,
reading the debian weekly news, i noticed a couple packages that i
have installed with newly-discovered security holes in them. the
newsletter says about these packages you know the drill. well, i
don't ...
reading up on security on the security FAQ, i see that just upgrading
to a higher
of the security limitations in
current versions and try to act accordingly.
In fact, I've never done the apt-get upgrade. Since installing Debian
in November, I've carefully upgraded packages I wanted and all the
relevant security updates by apt-get install packages and being
careful to check
Nori Heikkinen wrote:
hey,
reading the debian weekly news, i noticed a couple packages that i
have installed with newly-discovered security holes in them. the
newsletter says about these packages you know the drill. well, i
don't ...
Assuming you have these
deb http://security.debian.org/
I've got apt-proxy set up and working fine for the main debian stable
and testting archives, but it doesn't work for security updates.
I have the security backend in apt-proxy configured as follows
add_backend /security/ \
$APT_PROXY_CACHE/security
On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 05:13:34PM +1100, Rob Weir wrote:
Sarge doesn't get security updates.
(...)
Sure, but you'll out on other (non-security) bugfixes that might come
down. Assuming you mean stable, anyway.
I see! I assume the security in sarge is handled with recent updates
from
On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 10:53:48PM +0100, Alexander Fitterling wrote:
On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 05:13:34PM +1100, Rob Weir wrote:
Sarge doesn't get security updates.
(...)
Sure, but you'll out on other (non-security) bugfixes that might come
down. Assuming you mean stable, anyway.
I
Hello everyone.
Be a minimalist - could one use the /etc/apt/sources.list with only
the security line added? (for instance: deb
http://security.debian.org/ sarge/updates main non-free)
If I did not update the entire packages on regular basis with any
mirror available, does the only line above
On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 01:53:59AM +0100, Alexander Fitterling said
Hello everyone.
Be a minimalist - could one use the /etc/apt/sources.list with only
the security line added?
Sure.
(for instance: deb
http://security.debian.org/ sarge/updates main non-free)
Sarge doesn't get security
Hi there,
I'm just netinstalling Debian sarge (testing) on a VMWare guest, and while
doing this I selected Debian's (automatic) security updates functionality.
So now I notice that while Debian loads testing packages for the
netinstall itself, at the same time it loads stable packages from
On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 11:00:38AM +0200, Jörg Hartmann wrote:
I'm just netinstalling Debian sarge (testing) on a VMWare guest, and while
doing this I selected Debian's (automatic) security updates functionality.
So now I notice that while Debian loads testing packages for the
netinstall
Hello,
I'm looking for a way to automatically install security updates on a webserver, but
with a twist - that the installation should be delayed a few days.
My reasoning for wanting this is based on these assumptions:
* The Internet is an extremely hostile network.
* New security flaws
Jacob Anawalt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is there a not-so-transparent proxy doing virus scanning and
uncompressing but not recompressing the files, or is it just that it
doesn't like woody?
deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main contrib non-free
DOH! It was my firewall
Possibly a newbie issue here but the lines:
deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r1 Update CD 20030109: i386]/ woody contrib main
non-US/contrib non-US/main non-US/non-free non-free
deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 r1 _Woody_ - Official i386 Binary-7 (20021218)]/
unstable contrib main non-US/contrib
Chuck Mattern wrote:
Possibly a newbie issue here but the lines:
deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r1 Update CD 20030109: i386]/ woody contrib main
non-US/contrib non-US/main non-US/non-free non-free
deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 r1 _Woody_ - Official i386 Binary-7 (20021218)]/
unstable contrib
The posts that arrive from the Debian Security list show package updates
for Woody. How does one ensure that these same updates are applied when
running a mixed system (testing stable)?
For instance:
Recently a post for mysql-common indicated an update was available. If
I run apt-cache policy
Lou Losee said:
The posts that arrive from the Debian Security list show package updates
for Woody. How does one ensure that these same updates are applied when
running a mixed system (testing stable)?
As long as there aren't people working to put security updates into
testing, you won't
as there aren't people working to put security updates into
testing, you won't see any 'security team' updates to testing.
http://www.debian.org/releases/ (read the testing section)
So you have to wait for the package maintainer to fix it, release the fix
into unstable (which if you've been following
)?
As long as there aren't people working to put security updates into
testing, you won't see any 'security team' updates to testing.
http://www.debian.org/releases/ (read the testing section)
So you have to wait for the package maintainer to fix it, release the
fix
into unstable (which
Hi,
I'm staring with Debian and find the security updates very usefull with
apt-get
It's very comfortable to keep one's packages up to date
But what happens when a package update concerns the Kernel? Should the
kernel be re-compiled or not?? is it automatically re-compiled?
Vincent
for the
new kernel. The new kernel will be set as the default.
Greg
Vincent Dupont wrote:
Hi,
I'm staring with Debian and find the security updates very usefull with
apt-get
It's very comfortable to keep one's packages up to date
But what happens when a package update concerns the Kernel? Should
[Please don't top quote! It makes your message harder to read,
especially in long threads.]
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 01:03:47PM +0100, Greg Bolshaw wrote:
Vincent Dupont wrote:
Hi,
I'm staring with Debian and find the security updates very usefull with
apt-get
It's very comfortable
* Michelle Konzack [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-08-12 01:29]:
On 2003-08-11 22:18:09, Martin Schulze wrote:
Maybe because you haven't sent a mail or sent to a person
who doesn't speak German. Believe me, it's always a *bad*
idea to send a German mail into a worldwide project if you
don't manually
Also im DSA-358-1 geht es um den linux-kernel-2.4.18 und da ist irgendwie was
schiefgegangen, denn das Zeugs existiert nicht...
Der kernel ist zum Beispiel:
kernel-image-2.4.18-1-i386_2.4.18-9_i386.deb
aber den gibt es nicht, weil er nänmlich
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:23:36 -0400
Johann Koenig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
apt-cache show cron-apt
Thank you. I've downloaded it and I'll give it a try.
Kevin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 18:44:31 -0700
Mike Fedyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 08:23:36PM -0400, Johann Koenig wrote:
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:10:48 -0400
Kevin McKinley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to use cron to apply updates from
security.debian.org?
Is there a way to use cron to apply updates from security.debian.org?
Is there any reason I shouldn't do this?
Kevin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 08:23:36PM -0400, Johann Koenig wrote:
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:10:48 -0400
Kevin McKinley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to use cron to apply updates from security.debian.org?
Is there any reason I shouldn't do this?
apt-cache show cron-apt
How would
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Kevin McKinley wrote:
Is there a way to use cron to apply updates from security.debian.org?
Is there any reason I shouldn't do this?
every once in an eon or two .. something will break ...
and your production servers goes kapputt and goes on a temporary
sick leave
401 - 500 of 583 matches
Mail list logo
