Thanks everybody for the help. Now it is clearer for me!
Cheers,
Bruno.
On Sat, 2003-01-11 at 21:49, nate wrote:
> Bruno Diniz de Paula said:
>
> > the unstable version. This would mean that, in terms of solved bugs in the
> > *sofware* that could cause a security flaw, both woody and sid are ex
Bruno Diniz de Paula said:
> the unstable version. This would mean that, in terms of solved bugs in the
> *sofware* that could cause a security flaw, both woody and sid are exactly
> equal. Is it that?
in an ideal situation yes. sometimes even sid is updated before woody is.
but there are package
On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 07:37:55PM -0500, Bruno Diniz de Paula wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-01-11 at 15:20, nate wrote:
> > official security updates are ONLY available for stable and potato(at the
> > moment). unstable gets updates like normal, they include security updates
> > but are not specifically a
On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 07:37:55PM -0500, Bruno Diniz de Paula wrote:
> So what you mean is that if someone finds a security flaw on any
> package, the security team of Debian is informed and consequently the
> maintainer of that package is informed. Then the maintainer updates the
> package at woo
On Sat, 2003-01-11 at 15:20, nate wrote:
> official security updates are ONLY available for stable and potato(at the
> moment). unstable gets updates like normal, they include security updates
> but are not specifically advertised as so. It's up to the user to manage the
> security.
So what you m
Hi,
I have a doubt concerning security issues on stable and unstable branchs
of Debian. First question, are the security updates also applied to the
unstable packages? If so, is it "secure" to have a 24x7 Debian box
running unstable? The point is that I want it to be both a
HTTP/NFS/NIS/DB server
6 matches
Mail list logo
