On Wednesday 17 March 2004 13:17, Michal Jaegermann wrote: > It looks to me that these packages _are_ affected. > > At least for 7.3 it looks like packages listed in RHSA-2004:119-01 > (for example http://lwn.net/Articles/76125/ ) need just a modified > "Release:" field in specs and that is about it. > > ftp://updates.redhat.com/enterprise/2.1AS/en/os/SRPMS/openssl-0.9.6b- >36.src.rpm > ftp://updates.redhat.com/enterprise/2.1AS/en/os/SRPMS/openssl095a-0.9 >.5a-24.src.rpm > ftp://updates.redhat.com/enterprise/2.1AS/en/os/SRPMS/openssl096-0.9. >6-25.7.src.rpm > > Just finished recompiling on RH7.3 an equivalent of > openssl-0.9.6b-36.src.rpm and a compilation process runs quite a few > tests while doing the job. I will put something in bugzilla when I > will check more. What makes you think they are? The only thing they are effected by is CAN-2004-0081, which is a one line fix. See http://cvs.openssl.org/chngview?cn=5721 for the fix. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) Was I helpful? Let others know: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating
Attachment:
pgp00275.pgp
Description: signature
-- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
