Re: RHSA-2005:472-05 (kernel security update) not required for all?

[Stephen Gardner <stephen-rhel uk org>]

On Thu, 26 May 2005, Ben wrote:

> On Thu, 26 May 2005, Tom Sightler wrote:
>
> >  I had several machines that I noticed seemed out-of-sync yesterday.
> >  Updates would show in up2date but not in RHN.  I scheduled an "Update
> >  Package List" for the given systems and, once that was complete,
> >  everything seemed back in sync again.
>
> "redhat.com
>  is temporarily unavailable. Please try back later."
>
> (-:
>
>
> >  Was this just coincidence and the systems would have eventually synced
> >  anyway?
>
> Unknown.  I am (when RHN allows) going to schedule just that for all my 
> machine and see what happens.

Ben,

  Just a quick follow up to say the RHEL3 systems I look after are showing 
up as needing  RHSA-2005:472-05  today. I thought about it some more and 
believe that if you had gone to U5 prior to the release of this errata 
you had to wait until the RHN errata handler reached your RHN account and 
updated your records to flag machines as needing RHSA-2005:472-05. Jay 
Turner hinted that that's an area Red Hat are looking to improve. As I 
forced my systems to go U5 (or simply to get the U5  redhat-release 
package) after the erratas release this trigger the RHN records for those 
machines to be updated as needing  RHSA-2005:472-05   immediately. Today 
my account has obviously been read by the RHN errata handler and now all 
of my systems now need RHSA-2005:472-05. I think that might be the 
explanation for our different encounters with RHN this time around.

Regards,
  Stephen