Re: apt-get and glibc update

[Nate Amsden <aphro@aphroland.org>]

Federico Grau wrote:
> 
> Actually ... no :-( ... I commented that line out because I did not know what
> it did and could see no mention of it in the man page (sources.list 5).
> 
> Why would security updates need a seperate sources line?  Shouldn't they
> simply be considered part of the distribution?

security fixes are usually quick patches to fix a hole not fully tested.
an example of this is redhats glibc update (a couple days ago?) seem to
have broken their JDK setup, someone on bugtraq reccomended that people
that need JDK either don't use the update or recompile JDK under the new
glibc.

once they are fully tested and declared stable they are usually put into
the distribution. 

nate

-- 
:::
ICQ: 75132336
http://www.aphroland.org/
http://www.linuxpowered.net/
aphro@aphroland.org