On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 13:38 +0100, Simon Heywood wrote: > On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 at 13:18:42 +0000, Maurizio Lemmo - Tannoiser wrote: > > On marted́ 29 marzo 2005, alle 00:34, Adam M. wrote: > > > >But 2.4.18 is the Debian stable kernel, which gets security updates > > > >and patches, no? > > > > > > No, it doesn't. I really think that packages like this old kernel > > > should be removed from the mirrors, or at least updated with big fat > > > warning. > > > > Sorry, but this isn't correct. kernel 2.4.18-1 in woody is patched > > against known vulnerability. > > The security team have quietly stopped updating it, preferring to > concentrate on the Sarge kernels.
Please back this up with proof please. Otherwise you'll be disliked even more for your obvious lack of tact. > > Recent [vulnerabilities] involve code not present in this release of > > kernel. > > Some of them, maybe. But take a look at #289708 for an example of an > unfixed vulnerability in Woody's 2.4.18. Maybe because of this little fact you might just want to point out: Maintainer for kernel-source-2.4.18 is Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> As if you don't know the implications of that. IIRC, You were in the argument, though not hugely, which gave him cause to resign from Debian. Quit making assumptions based on your beliefs and provide real tangible proof. Otherwise please take it elsewhere. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
