[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SEUL: "Core" proof-of-concept

To: seul-project@seul.org
Subject: Re: SEUL: "Core" proof-of-concept
From: George Bonser <grep@oriole.sbay.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 23:14:23 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980116212949.29512I-100000@calvin.shorelink.com>
Sender: owner-seul-project@seul.org
To-Get-Off-This-List: mail majordomo@seul.org, body unsubscribe seul-project


The debian 2.0 base contains 3 different kernels:

2.0.29
2.0.30
2.0.32

As I think 2.0.32 has proven very stable and offers considerable security
protection for the end user, I intend to REMOVE the following packages
from the tentative SEUL-base that I am constructing:

kernel-doc-2.0.29
kernel-doc-2.0.30
kernel-headers-2.0.29
kernel-headers-2.0.30
kernel-image-2.0.29
kernel-image-2.0.30
kernel-source-2.0.29
kernel-source-2.0.30
pcmcia-modules-2.0.29
pcmcia-modules-2.0.30

Any objections?


George Bonser 
If NT is the answer, you didn't understand the question. (NOTE: Stolen sig)
http://www.debian.org
Debian/GNU Linux ... the maintainable operating system.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: SEUL: "Core" proof-of-concept
  - From: Neilen Marais <brick@cryogen.com>

References:
- Re: SEUL: "Core" proof-of-concept
  - From: George Bonser <grep@oriole.sbay.org>

Prev by Date: Re: SEUL: Re: What's the diff to SEUL ?
Next by Date: Re: SEUL: Re: What's the diff to SEUL ?
Prev by thread: Re: SEUL: "Core" proof-of-concept
Next by thread: Re: SEUL: "Core" proof-of-concept
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread