| |||||||||||||
Security last?Security last?Posted Nov 16, 2007 21:27 UTC (Fri) by s_cargo (guest, #10473)Parent article: Lots of stable kernel updates I would have preferred that the first patch to be applied (2.6.23.2) would be the security fixes, particularly because he describes them as "serious" security fixes.
(Log in to post comments)
Security last? Posted Nov 16, 2007 22:21 UTC (Fri) by AnswerGuy (guest, #1256) [Link] I suspect your best strategy in that case would be to apply the 2.6.22.16 patch (to a 2.6.22.* base) first; then apply any 2.6.23 patch to that. However you might have to resolve some collisions yourself in that case. JimD
Security last? Posted Nov 17, 2007 19:41 UTC (Sat) by jengelh (subscriber, #33263) [Link] >I would have preferred that the first patch to be applied (2.6.23.2) would be the security fixes, particularly because he describes them as "serious" security fixes. Well, can't you see the scheme? Obviously, putting the security patches last makes everyone upgrade to 2.6.23.8, and not "something" with 2 <= x <= 8.
|
|||||||||||||