| 1 |
begin quote |
| 2 |
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 22:39:45 +0100 |
| 3 |
Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> On Tuesday 03 February 2004 22:30, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 6 |
> > I was wondering what stable actually means, so I looked it up in the |
| 7 |
> > dictionary. Here's the definition I found most suitable to our |
| 8 |
> > purpose: |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > 3a. Consistently dependable; steadfast of purpose. |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > Now, I see nothing that implies that "dependable" means "can't |
| 13 |
> > upgrade." |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > What's your argument that makes backports superior to upgrades for |
| 16 |
> > bug fixes? Maybe I'm missing something. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Basically when one maintains a farm of computers with many users that |
| 19 |
> use it for various purposes there are a number of issues at play: |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Dont forget: |
| 22 |
all special purpouse/ homebrew / extra software has to be merged with |
| 23 |
the update, perhaps in a special order (openssl change fex.) in order |
| 24 |
to make testing complete. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
site-specific changes need to be repatched and changed (extra |
| 27 |
functionality, site-wide branding. (default homepages/configurations, |
| 28 |
bugreporting urls. you name it. ) |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
And yes, many sites do a complete reinstall from image rather than do |
| 32 |
"update with the package". Simply because its faster, or because |
| 33 |
operators are experienced and know that doing the "update" might not |
| 34 |
give the desired result in all cases. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
//Spider |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
begin .signature |
| 43 |
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature! |
| 44 |
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. |
| 45 |
end |
Archives