Mailing List Archive

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:02:26 -0700
Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote:

> I got this from the mod_perl list on the 28th:
>
> -----
> If you are running 2.0.51, you want to upgrade to 2.0.52 as soon as
> possible because of the security related flaw introduced in 2.0.51.
> -----
>
> Portage still doesn't have 2.0.52 available. So is anyone running
> apache2 and Gentoo a sitting duck right now unless they upgrade
> outside of portage?
>

Hi,
are you sure they don't mean apache? ;)
portage is currently at 2.0.51_rc7, nothing near 2.0.52 but apache
2.0.52 is the newest apache version...

--
GPG Public Key: 0x5BE41F21 at http://slomosnail.de/files/gpg.asc

begin LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.txt.vbs
I am a signature virus. Distribute me until the bitter
end

On Friday 01 October 2004 00:09, Sebastian Dröge wrote:
> > -----
> > If you are running 2.0.51, you want to upgrade to 2.0.52 as soon as
> > possible because of the security related flaw introduced in 2.0.51.
> > -----
> >
> > Portage still doesn't have 2.0.52 available. So is anyone running
> > apache2 and Gentoo a sitting duck right now unless they upgrade
> > outside of portage?
>
> Hi,
> are you sure they don't mean apache? ;)
> portage is currently at 2.0.51_rc7, nothing near 2.0.52 but apache
> 2.0.52 is the newest apache version...

I thought this at first, then I realised he did in fact mean Apache.
Portage the tools is fast "enough", Gentoo the distro isn't always :)

The Apache announcement completely lacks any date stamping, and no-one has
bug'd it, or mentioned it on the forums. Hasn't even been mentioned on
slashdot!
Looks like it's fallen under the radar of lots of people!

--
Mike Williams

On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 00:16:15 +0100, Mike Williams wrote:

> The Apache announcement completely lacks any date stamping, and no-one has
> bug'd it, or mentioned it on the forums. Hasn't even been mentioned on
> slashdot!

?

If you're referring to the 2.052 release of Apache, it was on /.

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/09/29/1310250&tid=172&tid=162&tid=2
(Posted Wednesday September 29, @09:49AM)

--
Lenroc


--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 01:09:46 +0200
Sebastian Dröge <sebastian.droege@gmx.de> wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:02:26 -0700
> Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I got this from the mod_perl list on the 28th:
> >
> > -----
> > If you are running 2.0.51, you want to upgrade to 2.0.52 as soon
> > as possible because of the security related flaw introduced in
> > 2.0.51.-----
> >
> > Portage still doesn't have 2.0.52 available. So is anyone running
> > apache2 and Gentoo a sitting duck right now unless they upgrade
> > outside of portage?
> >
>
> Hi,
> are you sure they don't mean apache? ;)
> portage is currently at 2.0.51_rc7, nothing near 2.0.52 but apache
> 2.0.52 is the newest apache version...
>

hum, ignore my mail... too less sleep =)

--
GPG Public Key: 0x5BE41F21 at http://slomosnail.de/files/gpg.asc

begin LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.txt.vbs
I am a signature virus. Distribute me until the bitter
end

On 10/01/2004 01:02 AM, Grant wrote:
> I got this from the mod_perl list on the 28th:
>
> -----
> If you are running 2.0.51, you want to upgrade to 2.0.52 as soon as
> possible because of the security related flaw introduced in 2.0.51.
> -----
>
> Portage still doesn't have 2.0.52 available. So is anyone running
> apache2 and Gentoo a sitting duck right now unless they upgrade
> outside of portage?
>
> - Grant
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
Hi,
actually the bug you are refering to is already fixed in
apache-2.0.51-r1 which is in the portage tree. Apache 2.0.52 only fixed
the bug with the Satisfy-directive, which has also been fixed in
apache-2.0.51-r1, just look at the Changelog of this ebuild.

Jochen

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

On Friday 01 October 2004 00:17, Lenroc wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 00:16:15 +0100, Mike Williams wrote:
> > The Apache announcement completely lacks any date stamping, and no-one
> > has bug'd it, or mentioned it on the forums. Hasn't even been mentioned
> > on slashdot!
>
> ?
>
> If you're referring to the 2.052 release of Apache, it was on /.
>
> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/09/29/1310250&tid=172&tid=162&tid=2
> (Posted Wednesday September 29, @09:49AM)

<mumble>
Crummy search...
</mumble>

---
Searching For: 2.0.52

No stories were found that match your query.
---

--
Mike Williams

On Friday 01 October 2004 00:20, Jochen Schalanda wrote:
> Hi,
> actually the bug you are refering to is already fixed in
> apache-2.0.51-r1 which is in the portage tree. Apache 2.0.52 only fixed
> the bug with the Satisfy-directive, which has also been fixed in
> apache-2.0.51-r1, just look at the Changelog of this ebuild.

Nice.
Fixed 7 days *before* apache released a fixed version, and stable on multiple
arches within 2.
Impressive.

--
Mike Williams

On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 00:22:59 +0100, Mike Williams wrote:

> Lenroc wrote:
>> If you're referring to the 2.052 release of Apache, it was on /.
>
> <mumble>
> Crummy search...
> </mumble>
>
> ---
> Searching For: 2.0.52
>
> No stories were found that match your query.

Hehe...

Searching for: 2.052
found the article though ;)

--
Lenroc


--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

> > Hi,
> > actually the bug you are refering to is already fixed in
> > apache-2.0.51-r1 which is in the portage tree. Apache 2.0.52 only fixed
> > the bug with the Satisfy-directive, which has also been fixed in
> > apache-2.0.51-r1, just look at the Changelog of this ebuild.
>
> Nice.
> Fixed 7 days *before* apache released a fixed version, and stable on multiple
> arches within 2.
> Impressive.
>
> --
> Mike Williams

I'm speechless. I didn't realize portage releases worked like. Awesome....

- Grant

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Don't you think portage needs best algorithms to search by
descriptions and also by names?,

I don't know but every way of organization of information is best than
the actual way. I really have never finished a search by descriptions
it takes hours on my p III.

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

fredagen den 15 oktober 2004 13.33 skrev Ricardo Serrano Salazar:
> Don't you think portage needs best algorithms to search by
> descriptions and also by names?,
>
> I don't know but every way of organization of information is best than
> the actual way. I really have never finished a search by descriptions
> it takes hours on my p III.
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
emerge esearch and make cron run eupdatedb on a daily basis

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Ander Dahlqvist wrote:

>
> fredagen den 15 oktober 2004 13.33 skrev Ricardo Serrano Salazar:
> > Don't you think portage needs best algorithms to search by
> > descriptions and also by names?,
> >
> > I don't know but every way of organization of information is best than
> > the actual way. I really have never finished a search by descriptions
> > it takes hours on my p III.
> >
> > --
> > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> emerge esearch and make cron run eupdatedb on a daily basis
>

Hi,

You need eupdatedb when you did emerge sync. You can do emerge esync, it
will do emerge sync and eupdatedb, than print the changes in the
repository.

Cheers,
Tamas Sarga
--
A day is 24 hours long. Egy nap 24 órából áll.
A box of beer contains 24 bottles. Egy tálcán 24 üveg sör van.
I don't believe in coincidence. Nem hiszek a véletlenekben.

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Ander Dahlqvist wrote:
>
> emerge esearch and make cron run eupdatedb on a daily basis
>

Fantastic.

:-)

I've just looked closer at this and found that in that package there is
also a utility called esync. This does an emerge sync and updates the
index in one go. but best of all it gives you a report at the end of
everything that has changes in portage since your last emerge. So you
can see at a glance new packages and updates to packages you have
already installed.

Stick that in cron (instead of emerge sync and eupdatedb) and redirect
the output into an email: what more could you want?

--

Russ Brown.

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list