For the Slackware64-14.2 update of Thu Jun 23 05:30:51 UTC 2022, should openssl-1.0.2u-x86_64 be at a "-4" instead of a "-3" with the recent rebuild? (There was a "-3" rebuild on Wed May 4 21:24:57 UTC 2022.)

It appears to be the same case with openssl-solibs-1.0.2u-x86_64.

Thank you for clarification.

mkeating24, I believe that you are correct.

What is the recommended method to apply these updates to Slackware64-14.2? Slackpkg does not recognize the security fix as a new version. Would upgradepkg recognize a difference? It might work to removepkg and then installpkg, but I worry about loss of connectivity (and certificates) in the midst of that process.

Should we wait for PV to send out another update (and, if so, is there a recommended way to make him aware of the problem ... beyond this post)?

TIA for any assistance.

I just downloaded them from a mirror (e.g., http://ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackwa..._slack14.2.txz and http://ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackwa..._slack14.2.txz) and changed the names from openssl-1.0.2u-x86_64-3_slack14.2.txz to openssl-1.0.2u-x86_64-4_slack14.2.txz and openssl-solibs-1.0.2u-x86_64-3_slack14.2.txz to openssl-solibs-1.0.2u-x86_64-4_slack14.2.txz and then installed with upgradepkg. The only thing is that then when you run slackpkg next, it'll offer to upgrade you to the same packages but with the one-off file names. I don't think it matters whether you "upgrade" after running slackpkg again or not; the files will remain the same.

Two ways to avoid that upgradepkg gets a problem next time:

1) Rename the packages to something little more unique, like openssl-1.0.2u-x86_64-3b_slack14.2.txz

2) Keep the name of the package and install it with "upgradepkg --reinstall"

regards Henrik

New packages issued today. Marked as "solved."