On 05/28/2015 11:50 AM, Leonard den Ottolander wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, 2015-04-02 at 14:25 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote: >> On 04/02/2015 11:45 AM, Leonard den Ottolander wrote: >>> Just noticed that the distro tag used in openssl is different from >>> upstream. Upstream and the last update (openssl-1.0.1e-30.el6_6.7) use >>> "el6_6" where as the latest update (openssl-1.0.1e-30.el6.8) uses >>> "el_6". Any reason for this discrepancy? >> >> could you please file this as a bug report at bugs.centos.org > > Weird, I thought I'd filed this issue and updated my account details at > bugs.centos.org at the same time somewhere in April. (I did update the > account details in my password manager.) However I seem to be unable to > find this bug report again and my account details still held the old > values. > > Now when I try to report the issue again the summary field of the form > provides me with the summary line that I used before, indicating that at > least I attempted to submit this issue ;) . > > Have there been issues with bugs.centos.org (restored from backup) or > could it be the bug report got deleted because my contact email was no > longer valid? > > Anyway, reported the issue again at > http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=8801 > > Beware that 1.0.1e-30.el6_6.9 < 1.0.1e-30.el6.8, so as long as the > release number starts with 30 the tag can not be safely restored. > > Regards, > Leonard. > Right .. once they move past -30 then we can fix it. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20150528/47a9f68d/attachment-0005.sig>