| 1 |
Hemmann, Volker Armin ha scritto: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> In almost every kernel release a security problem is found, that is fixed in a |
| 4 |
> stable release. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Stable release? AFAIK, *all* 2.6.x releases are stable releases. The |
| 7 |
days of double trees (2.4.x and 2.5.x) are gone. |
| 8 |
Probably I don't get what you mean. I use x86 kernels, not ~x86: that's |
| 9 |
what you mean as stable? I don't understand. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> and between that blue moons, your box is wide open to attacks. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Well, if in *every* kernel there is *always* a security problem, my box |
| 15 |
is always open to attacks... :) |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
(I understand your point, however. I didn't realize the linux kernel was |
| 18 |
so full of security holes. I thought it was one of the most secure |
| 19 |
components. Why aren't there GLSAs for the kernel?) |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> Which risk? Which mess? There is not a risk, if you use oldconfig. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
oldconfig doesn't always work well between major releases (2.6.x vs |
| 24 |
2.6.x+1). |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
>But there |
| 27 |
> is a big risk in security holes. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
True, but can you explain me the points above? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
m. |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives