Guest User!

You are not Sophos Staff.

Thread Info
  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 17 replies
  • Subscribers 2 subscribers
  • Views 4593 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Up2Date 9.350010

R0n1
http://ftp.astaro.de/UTM/v9/up2date/u2d-sys-9.315002-350010.tgz.gpg


Up2Date 9.350010 package description:

Remarks:
System will be rebooted
Configuration will be upgraded
Connected Wifi APs will perform firmware upgrade

News:
Update to 9.350
.
Features
Add support for new RED15 devices
Mesh support for AP15, AP55, AP100 in 2.4GHz
Update AppCtrl engine

Bugfixes:
Fix [34890]: REDs disconnected when connecting more than 270 concurrent RED tunnels
Fix [35338]: Bridge with RED: No warning that RED-interface will be removed from bridge when RED will be deactivated

RPM packages contained:
libnavlextensions-9.35-1.g109c0f2.rb4.i686.rpm    
 firmware-wifi-9350-0.204301433.gd2c0667.rb4.i586.rpm
firmware-wifi-stable-9350-0.204370747.gf57964e.rb4.i586.rpm
navl-tools-4.3.0.35-0.202460134.gff3d005.rb1.i686.rpm
red-firmware2-4500-0.203760687.gba82372.rb3.noarch.rpm
red15-firmware-4500-0.203760636.gd018a67.rb1.noarch.rpm
sophos-wifi-0.1-1.0.204377560.g2b96e0d.i686.rpm   
 vineyard-plugin-4-62.gc5fa541.rb3.i686.rpm        
 vineyard-plugin-tib-4-62.gc5fa541.rb3.i686.rpm    
 ep-awed-9.35-3.g6c8b5ca.rb1.i686.rpm              
 ep-branding-ASG-afg-9.30-26.gd2c8c94.rb1.noarch.rpm
ep-branding-ASG-ang-9.30-26.gd2c8c94.rb1.noarch.rpm
ep-branding-ASG-asg-9.30-26.gd2c8c94.rb1.noarch.rpm
ep-branding-ASG-atg-9.30-26.gd2c8c94.rb1.noarch.rpm
ep-branding-ASG-aug-9.30-26.gd2c8c94.rb1.noarch.rpm
ep-confd-9.35-124.gc3261ff.i686.rpm               
 ep-mdw-9.35-76.g5b9da88.rb1.i686.rpm              
 ep-red-9.35-7.gc1bc039.rb1.i686.rpm               
 ep-up2date-9.35-7.g219fd45.rb1.i686.rpm           
 ep-up2date-downloader-9.35-7.g219fd45.rb1.i686.rpm
ep-up2date-pattern-install-9.35-7.g219fd45.rb1.i686.rpm
ep-up2date-system-install-9.35-7.g219fd45.rb1.i686.rpm
ep-webadmin-9.35-98.g76293dc.i686.rpm             
 u2d-appctrl43-9-4.i686.rpm                        
 u2d-ohelp9-9-116.i686.rpm                         
 ep-httpproxy-9.35-77.g47b5615.rb3.i686.rpm        
 ep-release-9.350-10.noarch.rpm


This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • 0
    And, to be clear, this thread is NOT the official announcement from Sophos about this mini-feature-release (9.350) which is more a branch than upgrade...
    @RonaldJ you're not a staff member, I guess?
    So please don't be suprised, it would be better when "fan boys" could wait for official announcement instead posting incomplete "facts".
    Thanks
Reply
  • 0
    And, to be clear, this thread is NOT the official announcement from Sophos about this mini-feature-release (9.350) which is more a branch than upgrade...
    @RonaldJ you're not a staff member, I guess?
    So please don't be suprised, it would be better when "fan boys" could wait for official announcement instead posting incomplete "facts".
    Thanks
Children
  • 0 in reply to 127.0.0.1

    So please don't be suprised, it would be better when "fan boys" could wait for official announcement instead posting incomplete "facts".
    Thanks


    Whats incomplete about the posting? All information comes straight from the package.

    Nope, not a staffmember [;)]
  • 0 in reply to R0n1
    Whats incomplete about the posting? All information comes straight from the package.


    You're asking?
    I'm answering:
    Incomplete in relation to Alan's additional information about the 9.35x branch.

    cheers
  • 0 in reply to 127.0.0.1

    So please don't be suprised, it would be better when "fan boys" could wait for official announcement instead posting incomplete "facts".


    Sophos could do a much better job of proactively providing such information in advance or simultaneously with such package publications.  Sophos could also, or instead, better control the timing and location of package publication.

    None of the real issues seem well addressed by name calling or otherwise belittling people, users or customers.
  • 0 in reply to teched_01
    Sophos could do a much better job of proactively providing such information in advance or simultaneously with such package publications.  Sophos could also, or instead, better control the timing and location of package publication.

    None of the real issues seem well addressed by name calling or otherwise belittling people, users or customers.


    @teched
    a new package on FTP doesn't mean "install me ASAP". As you can check the times/dates, the user published his incomplete post few minutes after the package was uploaded to FTP... so... sorry [:)]

    No one is forcing other to install unannounced packages.
    In worst case a package "can" be uploaded mistakenly, and then?

    I don't want install stuff without an official announcement.

    regards
Unfiltered HTML