On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Yury V. Zaytsev <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, 2011-09-03 at 12:49 -0700, Todd And Margo Chester wrote: > >> The one my provider provides is way out of date and, arguably because >> of it, a security hazard. > > Not sure what your provider is, but mine is Red Hat and I am not aware > of known security risks in Firefox RPMs they are shipping. If there are > such risks they should be let known to them, so that they are patched.
Yes, the following link may help (note that it applies to clones such as SL and CentOS): https://access.redhat.com/security/updates/backporting/?sc_cid=3093 >> Other than that, I am throughly confused as to your point. Maybe I >> am missing something. > > I guess his point was that you should build your own RPMs if you > desperately need latest Firefox, using binary releases from Mozilla is > not the best option, although they might work to a certain extent. About installing from source, this CentOS wiki explains why it must be done with great care (if it is indeed needed): http://wiki.centos.org/PackageManagement/SourceInstalls Akemi _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.repoforge.org/mailman/listinfo/users
