-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Jesse Keating wrote: >On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 13:36 -0700, Michal Jaegermann wrote: > >>Do you mean that one from August? >>https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2005-748.html >>CAN ids between that one and >>http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/14088/info >>do not agree although the latest worm descriptions would suggest >>that RHSA-2005:748-05 is the correct one. > > >Seems that 2005-748 superceeded 2005-564. Same bug text, I wonder if >it was an enhanced patch or another discovery. Either way we should >base our package from 748 and backport all that our current packages >don't have. > Ok, FC1 already has the patch for CAN-2005-1921.... All be need to do is add the patch for RHSA-2005:748-05 I'll have to compare the patches to be sure. James Kosin -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDcmpEkNLDmnu1kSkRA9uFAJ4kfG4gLVwFcLxqQXoc+xMRwkwAJwCePpUS 6bv62XDwkenChrJ2j9+CR6w= =Kmwq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Scanned by ClamAV - http://www.clamav.net -- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
