> 'route' from www.linux.org as soon as it was available, then the
> 2.0.32 expecting to have patch appear to discover a reverse patch. It
> didn't, that 2.0.31-teardrop patch wasn't in the 2.0.31->2.0.32
> patch. Excuse my (relative) naivety, but why wasn't it, and should I
Read the diffs. The ip_frag patch is there...it's just sufficiently
different from the one posted to bugtraq, that it was not tagged as being
a reversed or already applied patch.
> Second, your opinion please: for production servers do you believe
> 2.0.32 is or will prove to be superior to and more stable than 2.0.30,
Most likely. 2.0.32 is lots of little fixes, and went through several
pre-patches...so hopefully its all fixes and no new bugs.
> Third, probably a newbie query but the answer's out of date in the
> 'Welcome' FAQ, is there a changelog or similar accompanying patches
> that I just haven't found?
zless patch-2.0.32.gz
>From time to time, various people have posted comments on the contents of
each patch, but I don't know if anyone's currently doing that.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lewis <jlewis@fdt.net> | Unsolicited commercial e-mail will
Network Administrator | be proof-read for $199/message.
Florida Digital Turnpike |
______http://inorganic5.fdt.net/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key____