September 8, 2008 at 7:09 am
Maybe a silly question to ask but could someone explain why the version number of the latest SQL Server 2005 Security Hotfix MS08-040 which was released in July is 3068 and the latest build of SQL Server 2005 is currently 3282? Is it due to being a GDR as oppossed to a Cumulative Update?
I have read about the 2 release types but it doesn't explain why the version number is so much lower than the current version? I am presuming that any GDR versions get assigned a number between the SP2 version (3042) and 3100 and that any Cumulative updates are assigned a version number above 3100?
Regards
Carl
September 8, 2008 at 7:24 am
I think you would have to look into the idea of build streams. I'm not certain that this is what they are doing but that is my guess. So, the version that you were referring to was built off the codeset for 2005 (GDR) SP2+Q941203 and the next version build associated with that stream would be 3068. Obviously, I am guessing but I believe it to be accurate.
For a better view of this, which I believe will make sense in looking at it can be found on this site.
http://www.sqlsecurity.com/FAQs/SQLServerVersionDatabase/tabid/63/Default.aspx
Hope this helps.
David
@SQLTentmaker“He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” - Jim Elliot
September 8, 2008 at 7:31 am
I think I know what you mean. So the security fix has been developed against the base build of SQL Server 2005 SP2. As oppossed to the Cumulative Updates which are built from higher build code versions of SQL Server 2005 SP2. It's still confusing when you consider it is a relatively new fix and appears so far down the build list.
Thanks for the reply.
Carl
September 8, 2008 at 7:37 am
Agreed but it is one of those necessary oddities so that they can maintain proper releases to their customer community without forcing fixes on them that they don't want or need.
I used to work in an environment that had 3 dedicated build streams and that became difficult to manage and all our customers were internal. I can't imagine what it must be like for people like MS and other major software shops. Guess that is why I am a DBA and not a full time developer. I like what little hair I have left. 😛
David
@SQLTentmaker“He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” - Jim Elliot
September 8, 2008 at 7:40 am
😉
Thanks again David.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply