This release fixes a few critical problems in 2.4.23, including fixes
for two security bugs.
Upgrade is recommended.
Detailed changelog follows
Summary of changes from v2.4.23 to v2.4.24-rc1
============================================
<bjorn.helgaas:hp.com>:
o Fix 2.4 EFI RTC oops
<marcelo.tosatti:cyclades.com>:
o Andrea Arcangeli: malicious users of mremap() syscall can gain priviledges
<marcelo:logos.cnet>:
o Harald Welte: Fix ipchains MASQUERADE oops
o Change EXTRAVERSION to 2.4.24-rc1
<trini:mvista.com>:
o /dev/rtc can leak parts of kernel memory to unpriviledged users
Jean Tourrilhes:
o IrDA kernel log buster
On Mon Jan 05, 2004 at 10:18:35AM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>
>
> This release fixes a few critical problems in 2.4.23, including fixes
> for two security bugs.
>
> Upgrade is recommended.
How about also fixing the rt_sigprocmask syscall?
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0312.3/1247.html
-Erik
--
Erik B. Andersen http://codepoet-consulting.com/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>
>
> This release fixes a few critical problems in 2.4.23, including fixes
> for two security bugs.
>
> Upgrade is recommended.
Indeed!
I have noticed that 2.6.0 seems to have the same codes for mremap.c,
shouldnt 2.6.1 merge the following patch before release ?
- --- linux-2.4.23/mm/mremap.c 2003-08-25 11:44:44.000000000 +0000
+++ linux-2.4.24-rc1/mm/mremap.c 2004-01-04 20:52:19.000000000 +0000
@@ -241,6 +241,13 @@
if (new_len > TASK_SIZE || new_addr > TASK_SIZE - new_len)
goto out;
+ /*
+ * Allow new_len == 0 only if new_addr == addr
+ * to preserve truncation in place (that was working
+ * safe and some app may depend on it).
+ */
+ if (unlikely(!new_len && new_addr != addr))
+ goto out;
/* Check if the location we're moving into overlaps the
* old location at all, and fail if it does.
PS: I have also downloaded 2.6.1 bk6 snapshot patch and I have not seen
any diff for mremap.c.
- --
Mihai RUSU Email: [email protected]
GPG : http://dizzy.roedu.net/dizzy-gpg.txt WWW: http://dizzy.roedu.net
"Linux is obsolete" -- AST
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/+WMJPZzOzrZY/1QRAhv0AKDkgqimVpAMwBWavfKN+WjEU8SF+gCdHUiC
XBbcRzJA5zfsUboMK0N5jKs=
=eBik
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>This release fixes a few critical problems in 2.4.23, including fixes
>for two security bugs.
>
>Upgrade is recommended.
>
>Detailed changelog follows
Hmm. Does this "postpone" all stuff that already went into
2.4.24-preX? Like XFS... Just for my ignorance :-)
Thanks
Martin
=====
------------------------------------------------------
Martin Knoblauch
email: k n o b i AT knobisoft DOT de
www: http://www.knobisoft.de
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Martin Knoblauch wrote:
> >This release fixes a few critical problems in 2.4.23, including fixes
> >for two security bugs.
> >
> >Upgrade is recommended.
> >
> >Detailed changelog follows
>
> Hmm. Does this "postpone" all stuff that already went into
> 2.4.24-preX? Like XFS... Just for my ignorance :-)
Yes.
The 2.4.24-pre tree with all its modifications becomes 2.4.25-pre.
In article <[email protected]> you wrote:
>
> The 2.4.24-pre tree with all its modifications becomes 2.4.25-pre.
When we can expect 2.4.25-pre?
--
*[ ?T ]*
On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 06:44:19PM +0100, Lukasz Trabinski wrote:
> In article <[email protected]> you wrote:
> >
> > The 2.4.24-pre tree with all its modifications becomes 2.4.25-pre.
>
> When we can expect 2.4.25-pre?
Probably when marcelo thinks there are enough changes to make another -pre
release.
Now the real question is will it be 2.4.25-pre4 or 2.4.25-pre1? ;)
On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 03:13:43PM +0200, you [Mihai RUSU] wrote:
>
> I have noticed that 2.6.0 seems to have the same codes for mremap.c,
> shouldnt 2.6.1 merge the following patch before release ?
What about 2.2 (and 2.0)?
-- v --
[email protected]
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> > > The 2.4.24-pre tree with all its modifications becomes 2.4.25-pre.
> >
> > When we can expect 2.4.25-pre?
>
> Probably when marcelo thinks there are enough changes to make another -pre
> release.
>
> Now the real question is will it be 2.4.25-pre4 or 2.4.25-pre1? ;)
I have asked because on one machine (with heavy load) i have problems
with 2.4.23 and 2.4.24-pre* - crashes without any information (no oops)
in logs file or console (connected via RS). Only blank screen. Sync or
umount via SysRq doesn't work, only (re)boot. System is RH 9, ext3
2x2.66GHz (with HT), aic79xx, 4GB RAM +4GB swap.
--
*[ ?ukasz Tr?bi?ski ]*
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Lukasz Trabinski wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> > > > The 2.4.24-pre tree with all its modifications becomes 2.4.25-pre.
> > >
> > > When we can expect 2.4.25-pre?
> >
> > Probably when marcelo thinks there are enough changes to make another -pre
> > release.
> >
> > Now the real question is will it be 2.4.25-pre4 or 2.4.25-pre1? ;)
>
> I have asked because on one machine (with heavy load) i have problems
> with 2.4.23 and 2.4.24-pre* - crashes without any information (no oops)
> in logs file or console (connected via RS). Only blank screen. Sync or
> umount via SysRq doesn't work, only (re)boot. System is RH 9, ext3
> 2x2.66GHz (with HT), aic79xx, 4GB RAM +4GB swap.
Hi Lukasz,
Which kernels work on this box?
Have you tried any other 2.4.x or 2.6.x ?
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> Hi Lukasz,
>
> Which kernels work on this box?
>
> Have you tried any other 2.4.x or 2.6.x ?
Yes, most of 2.4.X Most of them works well, except (2.4.20?-22 was problem
with aplication like slocate or amanda backup running on big ext3 area).
--
*[ ?ukasz Tr?bi?ski ]*
SysAdmin @wsisiz.edu.pl