| 1 |
On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 17:02 +0100, Nagy Gabor Peter wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi list, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> I have a question: |
| 5 |
I think you had more than a single question... But the list is here to |
| 6 |
get help so the more questions the merrier ;-). |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> Since I am new to gentoo, I don't know how security updates work. |
| 9 |
GLSA is what you're looking for. You can see all current security |
| 10 |
announcments at http://www.gentoo.org/security/en/glsa/ |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> I know Debian. In Debian if I have stable installed on a production |
| 13 |
> server, I get regular security fixes, often backported from the current |
| 14 |
> bleeding edge version, where upstream has fixed the bug to the version |
| 15 |
> that Debian stable contains. |
| 16 |
On Gentoo it is back ported as needed. Often the latest version contains |
| 17 |
the fix and as long as it is stable on all supported arches the fix will |
| 18 |
not be back ported to older versions. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> I have noticed that in gentoo there are many versions of a package that |
| 21 |
> are considered stable. Take glibc as an example, according to |
| 22 |
> http://packages.gentoo.org/search/?sstring=glibc, on x86 there are 8 |
| 23 |
> versions available, all of them stable. |
| 24 |
If you look at http://www.gentoo.org/security/en/glsa/glsa-200410-19.xml |
| 25 |
you can see the fix was back ported in a bunch of -r# releases. If you |
| 26 |
have a doubt about security fixes to an older package release check |
| 27 |
GLSA. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> I have now two gentoo machines, one is going to be production, the |
| 30 |
> other is used to get me a little bit more familiar with the system. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> On the playground machine I have 2006.1 installed, glibc 2.4-r3 |
| 33 |
> On the production machine I have 2006.0, switched to hardened profile, |
| 34 |
> and then recompile, there I have glibc 2.3.6-r5 |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> I see now that glibc 2.4-r3 should be upgraded to 2.4-r4 (by the way, |
| 37 |
> where can I check the differences (Changelog) between two gentoo |
| 38 |
> versions (like r3 and r4)?) |
| 39 |
The change log is in the directory in your local portage tree. |
| 40 |
ie, /usr/portage/sys-libs/glibc/ChangeLog You can also use the |
| 41 |
unofficial portage listing page http://gentoo-portage.com to see the |
| 42 |
change log. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
> So my question: If someone finds a bug in glibc that gets corrected, |
| 45 |
> what does the gentoo maintainers do about it? Do they backport the fix |
| 46 |
> in all 8 versions? Or just in some of the versions and mark the not |
| 47 |
> fixed ones ~? |
| 48 |
~arch is the equivalent of Debian testing. They are simply packages that |
| 49 |
have been added to the tree but need to be verified stable. Packages |
| 50 |
that are stable but have a security issue do not go back to ~arch. It is |
| 51 |
only way from ~arch (testing) to arch (stable). |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
> Is there some mailinglist (like debian-security-announce) where such |
| 54 |
> security fixes are announced? |
| 55 |
Here is how to for how to check if any packages you have installed have |
| 56 |
an announcement after syncing. |
| 57 |
http://forums.vpslink.com/showthread.php?t=745 Basically |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
> What is the reason that the hardened profile selects the 2.3.6 version |
| 60 |
> instead of the 2.4? I mean not in glibc's case only, but generally. |
| 61 |
> Does libc 2.4 have troubles with ssp? |
| 62 |
That is the reason. The SSP patches that the hardened profile uses are |
| 63 |
not available for 2.4. They probably won't ever be available for 2.4 |
| 64 |
simply because 2.5 is in ~arch right now. Supposedly when 2.5 gets |
| 65 |
marked stable there will be SSP patches for it and it will be used on |
| 66 |
the hardened profile. |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
John Schember |
| 69 |
|
| 70 |
-- |
| 71 |
gentoo-hardened@g.o mailing list |
Archives