| 1 |
Tero Grundström schreef: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Holly Bostick wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> In this case, syncing less often wasn't an issue-- the reason I had to |
| 6 |
>> upgrade to 1.0.6 was due to a GLSA. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I don't find any GLSA on firefox-1.0.6. Even the official firefox release |
| 12 |
> notes doesn't list any security fixes. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
On the 20th, my system was listed as affected by this GLSA |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
GLSA 200507-14: |
| 18 |
Mozilla Firefox: Multiple vulnerabilities |
| 19 |
============================================================================ |
| 20 |
Synopsis: Several vulnerabilities in Mozilla Firefox allow |
| 21 |
attacks ranging from execution of script code with |
| 22 |
elevated privileges to information leak. |
| 23 |
Announced on: July 15, 2005 |
| 24 |
Last revised on: July 15, 2005: 01 |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Affected package: www-client/mozilla-firefox-bin |
| 27 |
Affected archs: All |
| 28 |
Vulnerable: <1.0.5 |
| 29 |
Unaffected: >=1.0.5 |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
However, at the time I was using 1.0.5-r1 (installed on the 19th). |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
I didn't look at the GLSA that clearly at the time (just saw Firefox), |
| 34 |
so I didn't realize that I was in fact not supposed to be affected, but |
| 35 |
glsa-check mailed me that I was. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
So that explains that, if it explains it at all. glsa-check is not |
| 38 |
perfect, apparently; perhaps it made a mistake. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
>>> |
| 41 |
>>> There's no problem with using Firefox while it is being compiled. |
| 42 |
>>> Only as soon as it has actually been merged, it may be wise to |
| 43 |
>>> restart it. |
| 44 |
>> |
| 45 |
>> Not completely true. You can use an already-opened instance of |
| 46 |
>> Firefox--- as long as you stay within the same window. |
| 47 |
>> |
| 48 |
>> Open another window for any reason, and the whole thing will close down |
| 49 |
>> (because you can't open a new instance of Firefox while Firefox is |
| 50 |
>> compiling). So forums or database sites that open new windows to create |
| 51 |
>> posts, or display information about an item in the database are |
| 52 |
>> unuseable during this time. |
| 53 |
>> |
| 54 |
>> Rather than control my surfing, I prefer to use another browser until |
| 55 |
>> Firefox is finished compiling. |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> |
| 58 |
> Erhm.. I don't know how in the world you could be seeing this kind of |
| 59 |
> behavior while compiling firefox... |
| 60 |
> |
| 61 |
> Anyways, you're just so wrong here, Holly (and Benno is right). Don't you |
| 62 |
> understand the concept of compiling? When something is being compiled |
| 63 |
> *nothing* gets installed during that time, and so it couldn't interfere |
| 64 |
> with your current installation. The program gets installed only after |
| 65 |
> compiling has finished. |
| 66 |
> |
| 67 |
> make && make install, you know... or do you? |
| 68 |
|
| 69 |
Y'know, Tero-- bite me. Maybe I've got a (currently unknown) system |
| 70 |
problem that causes this behaviour only on my system, maybe I *used* see |
| 71 |
this behaviour, created a workaround, and haven't noticed that I don't |
| 72 |
need it anymore, maybe I'm using a different version of Portage than you |
| 73 |
which isn't quite as neat as the one you're using. |
| 74 |
|
| 75 |
You don't have to insult me with a strong implication that I'm stupid or |
| 76 |
something-- certainly over an issue that neither of us control |
| 77 |
(Portage), and certainly not over behaviour that I have clearly |
| 78 |
documented my experience of. |
| 79 |
|
| 80 |
Geez. |
| 81 |
|
| 82 |
Holly |
| 83 |
-- |
| 84 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives