Gentoo Archives: gentoo-security

From: Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o>
To: gentoo-security@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-security] Additional vulnerability in SAMBA <=3.0.7
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 15:07:12
Message-Id: 200411171606.29099.pauldv@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-security] Additional vulnerability in SAMBA <=3.0.7 by Calum
1 On Monday 15 November 2004 14:21, Calum wrote:
2 > On Monday 15 November 2004 12:50, Christophe Garault wrote:
3 > > This is one of my main question before having Gentoo on my servers.
4 > > What is the lifetime of ebuilds? Will I still be able to maintain
5 > > PHP4 in two years, or will I have to upgrade to PHP5 even if I don't
6 > > want new features?
7 >
8 > I wonder the same thing. I am building a server that will be very hard
9 > and expensive for me to access if anything goes wrong with the
10 > networking.
11 >
12 > I have the same questions - devfs and udev is the one I am asking
13 > myself currently. If I need to upgrade the kernel at some stage due to
14 > some exploit, or whatever, and devfs is dropped, do I trust myself to
15 > swap over to udev remotely, and get the device name changes perfect
16 > remotely?
17 >
18 > Or do I go for a slightly less mature udev now?
19 >
20 > Is there any policy document that says "Gentoo will move to UDEV (or
21 > PHP5, or Samba 4 etc) after 29th April 2005" ?
22
23 We don't have that kind of policy documents. Unfortunately the way to
24 operate "enterprise" gentoo is the following:
25
26 Create your own tree (from a certain stable point) that you manually copy
27 security fixes and local changes in. For the rest don't change the tree.
28 The default gentoo tree is like a moving target.
29
30 If you do this you have hit the metadistribution part of gentoo. It gives
31 the building blocks for your own distribution, and makes it a lot easier,
32 but does not make it plain simple, or no work at all.
33
34 Paul
35
36 --
37 Paul de Vrieze
38 Gentoo Developer
39 Mail: pauldv@g.o
40 Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net