DaveG wrote on 08/26/2008 10:46:01 AM:

> On Aug 22, 10:56 am, DaveG wrote:
> > On Aug 22, 8:41 am, "P. Sture" wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > In article ,
> > > koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:

> >
> > > > In article <00A7E75B.E1A3D...@SendSpamHere.ORG>, VAXman-

> @SendSpamHere.ORG
> > > > writes:
> > > > > FWIW, reading the patch description text (Yes, with my specson),

there
> > > > > is nothing to indicate the severity of or need for applying

> this patch!
> > > > > I'd wager that there are sites that will NEVER install this

> patch unless
> > > > > they see some buffer overflow in SMG. Unless this patch is

> listed as a
> > > > > SECURITY patch, people not following what has been going on

> here for the
> > > > > better part of a week will not install it.

> >
> > > > Yes. the rating is INSTAL_1, but it should be a MUP!

> >
> > > I second that 100%!

> >
> > > --
> > > Paul Sture

> >
> > FWIW, I sent Ann Mc... a comment regarding the MUP Vs Install 1
> > thingie.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -

>
> Got a reply. Was told the SMGRTL patch will become a MUP. Will also
> be included as such in the next release of OpenVMS.
>

That's the next release of OpenVMS VAX, right 8-) ?
> They listened.
>