On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 01:48:29PM -0500, William Warren wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 11:41:44AM -0500, Jeff Kinz wrote:
> > Oh nuts, It's started snowing in Massachusetts, AGAIN!
> >
> > Does anybody know if there's any Linux development work being
> > done in Key West? :-)
>
> Yes, but
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 11:41:44AM -0500, Jeff Kinz wrote:
[snip]
> Oh nuts, It's started snowing in Massachusetts, AGAIN!
>
> Does anybody know if there's any Linux development work being
> done in Key West? :-)
Yes, but they don't like New Englanders: we always insist on
using STRICT.
B
Info! Where? hehe I'm from FL but had to escape the draught of IT work
for Atlanta. Wouldn't mind moving back home.
(Dreadfully off-topic, I know.)
<>
On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 11:47, Jonathan M. Slivko wrote:
> >Oh nuts, It's started snowing in Massachusetts, AGAIN!
> >
> >Does anybody know if
>Oh nuts, It's started snowing in Massachusetts, AGAIN!
>
>Does anybody know if there's any Linux development work being
>done in Key West? :-)
Jeff,
Have you tried going for a systems administrator/network administrator
position down in Florida? Datacenters are popping up left and right down
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 11:18:35AM -0500, Joe Polk wrote:
> Yes, yes, I am very much aware of this. I went to my 7.3 server and ran
> up2date the other day and updated it. Then last nite, I ren up2date
> again to pull some more updates and noticed sendmail-cf and devel came
> down. I didn't realize
Yes, yes, I am very much aware of this. I went to my 7.3 server and ran
up2date the other day and updated it. Then last nite, I ren up2date
again to pull some more updates and noticed sendmail-cf and devel came
down. I didn't realize that RH didn't really label the sendmail update
as 8.12 for RH7.3
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 10:31:02PM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jeff Kinz wrote:
>
> > A buffer overflow security problem is the reason. The bug has been fixed
> > and these updates allow user's of any RH release to update their particular
> > version of sendmail without having to do a major
Jeff Kinz wrote:
> A buffer overflow security problem is the reason. The bug has been fixed
> and these updates allow user's of any RH release to update their particular
> version of sendmail without having to do a major sendmail upgrade which
> could break their configuration.
Sorry, I don't qu
On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 11:58:36PM -0500, Joe Polk wrote:
> My bad. FOr RH7.3 that is the latest sendmail, not 8.12. Hmmm.
>
> On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 23:56, Joe Polk wrote:
> > Why is up2date pushing 8.11 sendmail-cf and sendmail-devel rpms onto a
> > sendmail-8.12 isntall?
> >
> > sendmail-cf-8.1
My bad. FOr RH7.3 that is the latest sendmail, not 8.12. Hmmm.
On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 23:56, Joe Polk wrote:
> Why is up2date pushing 8.11 sendmail-cf and sendmail-devel rpms onto a
> sendmail-8.12 isntall?
>
> sendmail-cf-8.11.6-23.73.i3
> sendmail-devel-8.11.6-23.73
>
> Should I be concerned?
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
