LWN: Comments on "Lots of stable kernel updates"

Security last?

jengelh — 2007-11-17T19:41:51+00:00

>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.

Lots of stable kernel updates

nix — 2007-11-17T12:48:35+00:00

2.6.23.8 is the latest 2.6.23-stable and incorporates all the earlier 
ones, so yes.

Lots of stable kernel updates

job — 2007-11-17T11:10:06+00:00

This is not very clear. Am I safe with applying .8 only? The security fixes look critical.

Security last?

AnswerGuy — 2007-11-16T22:21:09+00:00

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?

s_cargo — 2007-11-16T21:27:53+00:00

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.

Lots of stable kernel updates

flewellyn — 2007-11-16T19:52:16+00:00

Oh, right.  Geez, what is wrong with me today?  Don't answer that.  :-)

Lots of stable kernel updates

JonoPrice — 2007-11-16T19:48:12+00:00

The others are updates to 2.6.23

Lots of stable kernel updates

flewellyn — 2007-11-16T19:37:32+00:00

Just to be clear, here: if I were to apply 2.6.22.13, would I get the cumulative effects of
the rest?  Or am I going to have to apply all of them?