> -----Original Message-----
> From: centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim Perrin
> Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 11:13 PM
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Subject: Re: mod_security
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Thomas Dukes
> <tdukes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I installed mod_security yesterday. Unbelievable the
> amount of crap
> > it will stop in 24 hrs.
> >
> > Picked up the rpm at http://rpm.pbone.net
>
> Please be careful when doing this. It's very common (using
> irc support as a basis for evaluation) to have users grabbing
> any old rpm they come across from here and installing it.
> Make sure it's an rpm that's actually built for RHEL/CentOS
> of the appropriate version. There are a number of support
> requests for folks who have slapped in a fedora, mandrake, or
> aging redhat package only to find things are now broken.
Exactly why I was advocating it be in the CentOS distribution.
The rpm I used was mod_security-2.5.9-1.el5.i386.rpm. There was one lacking
dependency, lua-5.1.4-1.el5.i386.rpm.
So yes, do not install any rpm package that is not of the appropriate
version. Be there, done that, bought the tee-shirt!
>
> > This should be made part of the CentOS extra, contribs or whatever!!
> >
>
> mod_security is in the highly public EPEL 3rd party
> repository, as well as directly from the mod_security
> website, and several other 3rd party repos, jason litka,
> etc... While it might be nice to bring it closer to the
> distro, it's not exactly lacking in distribution.
>
>
> --
> During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
> revolutionary act.
> George Orwell
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
