SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Distribution: Slackware64-current with "True Multilib" and KDE4Town.
Posts: 9,104
Rep:
Quote:
Wed Apr 27 04:20:57 UTC 2016
xap/mozilla-firefox-45.1.0esr-x86_64-1.txz: Upgraded.
This release contains security fixes and improvements.
For more information, see: http://www.mozilla.org/security/know...irefoxESR.html
(* Security fix *)
Don't pay attention to my request. I just couldn't resist to post it :^)
Don't get me wrong, i would like to see 6.x in /testing, but the differences from 5.3 to 6.1 are for sure not a "minor update". 6.1 in testing might be helpful for packages that requires a newer GCC version (there are already packages that don't build fine on stock 14.1 because of the mature GCC). Would be nice to have at least a testing package for GCC >= 6.0 on -current.
Don't get me wrong, i would like to see 6.x in /testing, but the differences from 5.3 to 6.1 are for sure not a "minor update". 6.1 in testing might be helpful for packages that requires a newer GCC version (there are already packages that don't build fine on stock 14.1 because of the mature GCC). Would be nice to have at least a testing package for GCC >= 6.0 on -current.
I didn't get you wrong. I just though it was a good idea to request the newest GCC, since somebody had to it
Although we all know it is not going to enter the -current and we all are happy with that
Anyways, it's interesting idea to have GCC 6.x in /testing.
* Duplicate EDNS COOKIE options in a response could trigger an
assertion failure. This flaw is disclosed in CVE-2016-2088. [RT
#41809]
* The resolver could abort with an assertion failure due to improper
DNAME handling when parsing fetch reply messages. This flaw is
disclosed in CVE-2016-1286. [RT #41753]
* Malformed control messages can trigger assertions in named and
rndc. This flaw is disclosed in CVE-2016-1285. [RT #41666]
* Certain errors that could be encountered when printing out or
logging an OPT record containing a CLIENT-SUBNET option could be
mishandled, resulting in an assertion failure. This flaw is
disclosed in CVE-2015-8705. [RT #41397]
* Specific APL data could trigger an INSIST. This flaw is disclosed
in CVE-2015-8704. [RT #41396]
* Incorrect reference counting could result in an INSIST failure if a
socket error occurred while performing a lookup. This flaw is
disclosed in CVE-2015-8461. [RT#40945]
* Insufficient testing when parsing a message allowed records with an
incorrect class to be be accepted, triggering a REQUIRE failure
when those records were subsequently cached. This flaw is disclosed
in CVE-2015-8000. [RT #40987]
A new OpenSSL release will come out in a few days.
Quote:
These releases will be made available on 3rd May 2016 between approximately
1200-1500 UTC. They will fix several security defects with maximum severity
"high".
The installation script doesn't detect EFI partition on an NVMe disk. (If such disks became popular this could be a problem for 14.2, IMHO). In my concrete case I was able to fix the installation script, so hopefully it's an easy problem in general case. Namely, I installed the fresh -current to the Intel PCIe P3600 NVMe (Add-In Card) using usbboot.img (UEFI installation, of course). initrd.img (inside usbboot.img) contains a script /usr/lib/setup/SeTEFI which determines the EFI partition:
Code:
# Scan for EFI partitions:
for drive in sda sdb sdc sdd sde sdf sdg sdh sdi sdj sdk sdl sdm sdn sdo sdp ; do
We see that the script even doesn't try to search for an nvme disk. I changed this line to:
Code:
for drive in nvme0n1 ; do
Next goes the command that computes the number of the EFI partition and attach it to the disk name. In NVMe case the number should be prepended with letter "p", so I changed
Code:
cho /dev/$drive$(expr $(echo "$efisp" | cut -b 1-4)) >> $TMP/SeTefipartitions
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
