On 12/10/2015 09:47 AM, Noam Bernstein wrote: >> On Dec 10, 2015, at 10:40 AM, Leon Fauster <leonfauster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Am 10.12.2015 um 16:16 schrieb Noam Bernstein <noam.bernstein@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: >>> I guess this is really a RedHat, not CentOS question, but I’m hoping that someone here will be familiar enough with the upstream policy to have some useful information. >>> >>> How does RedHat decide which versions to release patches for, e.g. https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2015-7613 <https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2015-7613> which has only a RH7 erratum, not 6? And are they likely to eventually release a fix for this type of issue for RH6? >> >> Generally defined by the production phases: >> https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/ >> >> It explains not all but at least the big picture … > > That’s useful, thanks. > > It does seem to indicate that RH6 is still in production 1, with security and bug fix errata being released. So does that mean that I can expect RH to eventually release a fix for this CVE, but they just haven’t gotten around to it yet? > Backporting changes to the 2.6.32 kernel (el6) is much harder than to 3.10.0 kernel (el7) .. the further back you go, the more things are different from the items in those commits. I am sure they will fix it, it just takes more time to do and to test.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
