On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 09:11 -0700, Kevan Benson wrote: > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 08:49, you wrote: > > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 07:25, Karanbir Singh wrote: > > > Kevan Benson wrote: > > > > I'll admit, it does fit my above stated goal, but that's not the only > > > > reason I think it's worthwhile. Every other enterprise OS has their > > > > errata listed online. CentOS seems to be in the somewhat unique > > > > situation of having an upstream provider that has most the errata > > > > listed, so there's been less of a drive for this. > > > > > > not sure I understand, http://lists.centos.org/ has a list you can get to > > > via a webbrowser and even search around there for info if you like. > > > > I think one of us is referring to apples, the other apple pie. > > > > I'm not questioning the availability of the information, just it's > > presentation and accessibility. > > So, should I take the silence on this topic as no, there isn't any desire for > a web-based errata list beyond the searchable archives of the announce list, > or just that everyone's too busy to comment? FWIW: I do think it is useful. Lists are not very useful for asking things like "give me all vulnerabilities for package X from date A to date Z". Some more flexible database would be very useful. -- Daniel