| 1 |
On Fri, 2012-12-21 at 12:48 +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Friday, December 21, 2012 12:42:23 PM Michał Górny wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 12:31:28 +0100 |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > "J. Roeleveld" <joost@××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > On Friday, December 21, 2012 12:02:34 PM Michał Górny wrote: |
| 7 |
> > > > On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 11:24:45 +0100 |
| 8 |
> > > > |
| 9 |
> > > > "J. Roeleveld" <joost@××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 10 |
> > > > > On Friday, December 21, 2012 09:57:25 AM Michał Górny wrote: |
| 11 |
> > > > > > Just let me know when you have to maintain a lot of such systemd |
| 12 |
> > > > > > and upgrade, say, glibc. Then maybe you'll understand. |
| 13 |
> > > > > |
| 14 |
> > > > > A shared /usr means I need to update ALL the systems at once. |
| 15 |
> > > > > When /usr is not shared, I can update groups at a time. |
| 16 |
> > > > |
| 17 |
> > > > Yes, and this is what disqualifies it for the general case. If you |
| 18 |
> > > > can't update one at some point, you can't update the others or it is |
| 19 |
> > > > going to likely get broken in a random manner. |
| 20 |
> > > |
| 21 |
> > > Yes, but do you want to find out when the entire production environment is |
| 22 |
> > > down? Or would you rather do the upgrades in steps and only risk having to |
| 23 |
> > > rebuild a few nodes and have a lower performance during that time? |
| 24 |
> > > There is a big difference between 50% performance and 0%. |
| 25 |
> > |
| 26 |
> > Didn't you just state that you *have* to update all at the same time? |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Please re-read what I wrote. |
| 29 |
> I said, with a *shared* /usr, then yes, I do need to update the entire |
| 30 |
> environment at the same time. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
That's not true. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Stelian Ionescu a.k.a. fe[nl]ix |
| 36 |
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur. |
| 37 |
http://common-lisp.net/project/iolib |
Archives