Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 - 1-Year End Of Life Notice
| From: | bugzilla-AT-redhat.com | |
| To: | rhsa-announce-AT-redhat.com, enterprise-watch-list-AT-redhat.com | |
| Subject: | [RHSA-2008:0521-01] Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 - 1-Year End Of Life Notice | |
| Date: | Tue, 3 Jun 2008 03:09:13 -0400 | |
| Message-ID: | <200806030709.m5379DqQ018144@pobox.devel.redhat.com> |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
=====================================================================
Red Hat Security Advisory
Synopsis: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 - 1-Year End Of Life Notice
Advisory ID: RHSA-2008:0521-01
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux
Advisory URL: https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2008-0521.html
Issue date: 2008-06-03
=====================================================================
1. Summary:
This is the 1-year notification of the End Of Life plans for Red Hat
Enterprise Linux 2.1.
2. Relevant releases/architectures:
Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS (Advanced Server) version 2.1 - i386, ia64
Red Hat Linux Advanced Workstation 2.1 - ia64
Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES version 2.1 - i386
Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS version 2.1 - i386
3. Description:
In accordance with the Red Hat Enterprise Linux Errata Support Policy, the
7 year life-cycle of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 will end on May 31, 2009.
After this date, Red Hat will discontinue the technical support services,
bug fix, enhancement, and security errata updates for the following
products:
* Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS 2.1
* Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES 2.1
* Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS 2.1
* Red Hat Linux Advanced Server 2.1
* Red Hat Linux Advanced Workstation 2.1
Customers still running production workloads on Red Hat Enterprise Linux
2.1 are advised to begin planning the upgrade to Red Hat Enterprise Linux
5. Active subscribers of Red Hat Enterprise Linux already have access to
all currently maintained versions of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, as part of
their subscription.
Details of the Red Hat Enterprise Linux life-cycle can be found on the
Red Hat website: http://www.redhat.com/security/updates/errata/
4. Solution:
This errata contains an updated redhat-release package, that adds a new
file to "/usr/share/doc/", which contains this end of life notice.
5. Package List:
Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS (Advanced Server) version 2.1 :
Source:
ftp://updates.redhat.com/enterprise/2.1AS/en/os/SRPMS/red...
ftp://updates.redhat.com/enterprise/2.1AS/en/os/SRPMS/red...
i386:
redhat-release-as-2.1AS-23.i386.rpm
ia64:
redhat-release-as-2.1AS-123.ia64.rpm
Red Hat Linux Advanced Workstation 2.1:
Source:
ftp://updates.redhat.com/enterprise/2.1AW/en/os/SRPMS/red...
ia64:
redhat-release-aw-2.1AW-23.ia64.rpm
Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES version 2.1:
Source:
ftp://updates.redhat.com/enterprise/2.1ES/en/os/SRPMS/red...
i386:
redhat-release-es-2.1ES-23.i386.rpm
Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS version 2.1:
Source:
ftp://updates.redhat.com/enterprise/2.1WS/en/os/SRPMS/red...
i386:
redhat-release-ws-2.1WS-23.i386.rpm
These packages are GPG signed by Red Hat for security. Our key and
details on how to verify the signature are available from
https://www.redhat.com/security/team/key/#package
6. References:
http://www.redhat.com/security/updates/errata/
http://www.redhat.com/security/updates/classification/#low
7. Contact:
The Red Hat security contact is <secalert@redhat.com>. More contact
details at https://www.redhat.com/security/team/contact/
Copyright 2008 Red Hat, Inc.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFIRO4TXlSAg2UNWIIRAoq1AJ9NglE5r+1rpsfiJseC8In/H8E3BQCggMLN
2xw9eqKhMIYvyeAZnGSLjE4=
=CsIE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Enterprise-watch-list mailing list
Enterprise-watch-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/enterprise-watch-...
Posted Jun 3, 2008 20:33 UTC (Tue)
by yodermk (subscriber, #3803)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted Jun 4, 2008 11:55 UTC (Wed)
by RobSeace (subscriber, #4435)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Jun 4, 2008 15:24 UTC (Wed)
by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Jun 4, 2008 16:38 UTC (Wed)
by RobSeace (subscriber, #4435)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 9, 2008 12:29 UTC (Mon)
by davidfulwiler (guest, #47890)
[Link]
Posted Jun 3, 2008 21:21 UTC (Tue)
by alspnost (guest, #2763)
[Link]
Posted Jun 3, 2008 22:19 UTC (Tue)
by epa (subscriber, #39769)
[Link] (14 responses)
Posted Jun 3, 2008 22:37 UTC (Tue)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link] (13 responses)
Posted Jun 3, 2008 23:16 UTC (Tue)
by pr1268 (guest, #24648)
[Link] (12 responses)
This one bothers me the most: one agendum, two agenda. Even as I type this, Firefox's (2.0.0.14) "spell checker" thinks agendum is misspelled (and recommends corrigendum as a replacement!). Then again, I'm usually more irritated at others' misuse of its/it's and there/their/they're, so oh well...
Posted Jun 3, 2008 23:46 UTC (Tue)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link]
Posted Jun 3, 2008 23:52 UTC (Tue)
by sbergman27 (guest, #10767)
[Link] (10 responses)
Posted Jun 3, 2008 23:58 UTC (Tue)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted Jun 4, 2008 2:52 UTC (Wed)
by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458)
[Link] (2 responses)
AFAIU, in China there are lots of different languages (not dialects!) spoken. This is not a case of "dialects drifted apart", the (official) language is... just the official one.
Posted Jun 4, 2008 7:37 UTC (Wed)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link]
Posted Jun 4, 2008 15:53 UTC (Wed)
by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167)
[Link]
Posted Jun 4, 2008 6:47 UTC (Wed)
by man_ls (guest, #15091)
[Link]
'Phonetic spelling' just means there is a univocal correspondence between phonemes and graphemes, but this correspondence doesn't have to be immutable: it can change throughout the globe. In Spanish we have more-or-less phonetic spelling, even though there are some 400 million native speakers in tens of countries, and it works. Actually, given that modern Spanish has mostly lost a few phonemes ('v' and 'b' are now the same, 'h' is silent, and 'll' is only pronounced in small areas of Castilla), I wish we went a little bit further along this way. Schoolboys and schoolmasters would be so grateful.
A bigger problem IMHO is that Latin was not a particularly rich language, what with 26 phonemes; some languages have 80+. Correspondingly, the Latin alphabet is quite poor. Trying to represent 9+ vowels with 5 signs is going to be difficult: witness the crazy patterns of accents and circumflexes in modern French. And consonants are even worse. But I agree with Steve, a bit of adaptation might go a long way.
Posted Jun 4, 2008 2:23 UTC (Wed)
by pr1268 (guest, #24648)
[Link] (1 responses)
If it were code, we'd be demanding a cleanup. Such a "code cleanup" has occurred before in history; consider the work done by Noah Webster. Interestingly, his work was aimed at standardizing spelling and pronunciation of American English--both which varied substantially amongst the different geographic regions of the United States in the early 1800s (and still do to a lesser extent nowadays). Ironic that I use the word standardizing; changing the 's' to a 'z' was one of Webster's "fixes".
Posted Jun 4, 2008 7:35 UTC (Wed)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link]
Posted Jun 4, 2008 3:48 UTC (Wed)
by jabby (guest, #2648)
[Link]
Posted Jun 5, 2008 8:50 UTC (Thu)
by epa (subscriber, #39769)
[Link]
Posted Jun 5, 2008 19:18 UTC (Thu)
by clugstj (subscriber, #4020)
[Link]
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 - 1-Year End Of Life Notice
Would be nice if this kind of note got people to upgrade. Some folks still use Red Hat 7.x
(mostly 7.3 but I have encountered a 7.1 and some 7.2 servers in the last year). RHEL 2.1 is
based on RHL 7.3, but the latter has been unsupported completely for quite a while now. The
fact that people are still running this stuff is frightening.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 - 1-Year End Of Life Notice
We have a mail server running Red Hat 5.2... Not RHEL 5.2, mind you, but
actual old-school RH 5.2 with a 2.0.36 kernel... Current uptime: 412 days...
Why run something so ancient? "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" ;-)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 - 1-Year End Of Life Notice
But as a mail server it touches data which was created by untrusted remote systems, probably
all the time (if it's outgoing only then less often). If you're not getting patches for years
then your mail server is bound to have serious bugs that are well known by Black Hats.
So unless all the mail related stuff is actually hand maintained, and by someone quite
diligent, sooner or later someone's going to break into it.
Once upon a time you'd know this had happened because lots of files would be deleted, the
login banner would be changed to "joo R 0wned. Props to Big Mikey and S00pe7M3n !!!11!!1!" or
whatever. Maybe you'd notice the thousands of attempts to telnet into other machines as root
with passwords like "letmein". Laughable stuff.
Today the people likely to break in will carefully repair the hole they used to get in, ensure
they don't disrupt the hardware's apparent purpose (in your case, sending and receiving mail)
and then go on to use it as part of huge network of machines supporting a criminal enterprise.
So it "ain't broke" and you continue to "not fix it" but somewhere a slightly gullible old
lady is "re-entering" her credit card details into a web page served by your "mail server"
which says it is her bank.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 - 1-Year End Of Life Notice
> If you're not getting patches for years
Not getting them from Red Hat != not getting them at all... That's the great
thing about open source (and, being a programmer ;-)): you can fix stuff
yourself, if the need arises...
> So unless all the mail related stuff is actually hand maintained
Oh, it is... We've upgraded the sendmail many times in the past for previous
issues... Had to hand-build our own RPMs, often applying our own patches and
tweaks to get things working right, but like I say, that's one of the major
benefits of open source...
And, actually being an ancient system tends to work in our favor securitywise,
in a purely "security by obscurity" way: the script-kiddies and scammers who
just run pre-made exploits generally won't have one that'll run on a system
that old... "Security by obsolescence", if you will... ;-)
I certainly wouldn't recommend everyone and their mothers run ancient systems
like that, of course... If you don't know what you're doing and manually
keep things patched up and running properly, you'll have big problems, as
you point out... But, if you know what you're doing, and value stability
of the system over the time it takes to keep it running as-is, then there's
nothing wrong with it... Like I say, that's really one of the hugest benefits
of open source, IMHO: the ability to keep old software running for as long
as you need it to, without being forced into an unnecessary upgrade cycle...
Not everyone CAN or SHOULD do it, but for those that can and need to, it's
an incredibly powerful benefit...
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 - 1-Year End Of Life Notice
Fantastic. Bravo... That really is the whole idea as I see it. This whole update a whole OS
and reinstall and that bit was introduced to us from those that sell out of the box broken
OS's I have run an old caching DNS server for years using some old Slackware. I know every
burp and hic-up that little honey goes through, because of this any irregularity really stands
out and I catch it. If it aint broke don't fix it again.
Dave From Milwaukee
Wow - I just have to wonder how Frankenstein that 2.4.9 kernel is by now, with 6 years worth of patches?! That's some seriously old-school technology still burbling away inside RHEL 2.1!
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 - 1-Year End Of Life Notice
Learn to pluralize
One erratum, two errata.
Learn to pluralize
"We have now been told correct datas and rethought our criterias," said a
spokesman. "There will be no more such erratas."
-- from _Heliograph_, 1993, reported in Langford, _You Do It With
Mirrors_
Learn to pluralize
I suspect that (rather ugly and non-English) singular/plural form is even
deader than hacker. Burchfield says (in Fowler) (citations elided)
Learn to pluralize
agenda. 1 The essential plurality of this word (= things to be
done) has become virtually extinct. Its dominant sense now is 'a list of
items to be considered at a meeting, etc.' [...] and it has produced a
plural in -s [...]. The former singular form agendum (i.e.
just one item to be discussed) is used principally in the out-of-term
meetings of Oxbridge governing bodies and other such admirable
institutions
[...].
For what it's worth, in thirty-plus years in the Home Counties I have
encountered not a single use of 'agendum', but then I didn't go to
Oxbridge...
Learn to pluralize
It's really time for all that crap to be dumped from the language in favor of consistency.
Ditto for non-phonetic spelling. Only arrogance has caused us to retain all these weird
plurals, unfathomable irregular verbs, and other inconsistent crap. Yes, I'm also in favor we
in the US biting the bullet and actually moving to SI measurements instead of just kinda sorta
pretending to a little. It's funny how shunning a bizarre and inconsistent system of
measurement and feeling comfortable with SI units is considered 'leet'... and using bizarre
and inconsistent pluralization is also considered 'leet'.
I'm a native English speaker. And even I see what a mess our language is. If it were code,
we'd be demanding a cleanup.
Learn to pluralize
Phonetic spelling is a catastrophically bad idea for any language spoken
outside a very restricted set of speakers, especially for a language as
popular as English. Why? Because what's phonetic spelling for you is not
phonetic spelling for a speaker who learned in Bangalore, or Perth, or,
gods forbid, Glasgow. Go phonetic and suddenly nobody outside your local
area spells the same way you do, and *still* virtually nothing you read
makes phonetic sense (to you).
In the end I'd almost expect English to do what Chinese has done (although
this might take a prolonged period of restricted global travel, so the
post-petroleum era). Already we've got nearly-mutually-incomprehensible
accents: given enough time and enough purely-written communication and you
end up with multiple mutually incomprehensible languages sharing only a
grammar and a writing system.
Chinese?
Chinese?
Yes, but they share a written form. They're mutually unintelligible, but
only when *spoken*.
Chinese?
The difference between a dialect and a language is like the difference between a sub-species
and a full-blown species, it's a matter of degree and always arguable.
"A language is a dialect with an Army and a Navy" is such a famous comment on this that it's
got a whole Wikipedia page devoted to it.
(All the below is based on book learning, I can't speak Chinese, and I don't know any actual
native Chinese speaking people well enough to interrogate them as to its accuracy, so caveat
emptor...)
The various Chinese "languages" today are closely related, and are all descended from Old
Chinese, just as today's English dialects are all descended from Old English, a language we
cannot understand today.
Indeed, although the written Chinese of a Wu speaker (from say, Shanghai) is not mutually
unintelligible with that of a Mandarin speaker (from say Beijing) as their speech would be,
they are certainly different and a native Chinese scholar would probably be able to tell you
whether an informal written note was written by a Wu speaker, it should be a much bigger
difference than you'd notice by the excess Zs in an American's writing, or the various
superfluous vowels in writing by an Englishman.
That is a bit of an exaggeration. Sure, the use of certain vowels (and even diphtongs) is not consistent across the whole English world, and there are some consonants which tend to vary a lot (the glottal stop is just a particularly surprising example, changing the 't' for a pause). But in no country is the 'k' in 'know' pronounced (and if so, it's time to drop it :). Likewise with most phonemes. IIRC Bryson says in "Mother tongue" that there are some 60-odd words pronounced the same as 'air', and that is not pretty.
Phonetic spelling
Learn to pluralize
Learn to pluralize
No it wasn't: z predates s, and Webster had nothing to do with it :) he
*did* zap the u in words like `colour', though.
For anyone interested in languages and words, I highly recommend "The Power of Babel" by John McWhorter.
language evolution
Learn to pluralize
It's really time for all that crap to be dumped from the language in favor of consistency.
Good idea - then you have one erratum, two erratums. Like one museum, two museums. I have no problem with that. But if you're going to try to be clever and use the plural in -a, at least get it right.
Language Purists
We entered the software field because we can create our own nice, neat, consistent reality
there. The real world isn't like that, get used to it. The English language is a hack of the
worst kind, but it works!