Subject: RE: build.sh feature request
To: Julio Merino <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Sporleder, Matthew (CCI-Atlanta) <Matthew.Sporleder@cox.com>
Date: 02/24/2003 11:20:26
The only problem with that is that you have to reinstall the entire =
I know it really isn't huge, but it's definitely larger than just being =
able to update
a few programs. On a very distributed system, small updates could =
really be a lifesaver.
And do you really feel safe reinstalling base.tgz on your production =
whenver a security advisory comes out? ;)
From: Julio Merino [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 11:23 AM
To: Sporleder, Matthew (CCI-Atlanta)
Subject: Re: build.sh feature request
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 11:00:06 -0500
"Sporleder, Matthew (CCI-Atlanta)" <Matthew.Sporleder@cox.com> wrote:
> That handles the system upgrade process.
> How about the patch-type updates? :)
Theorically syspkg helps in this. Suppose a security advisory is =
We could release together with it new versions of the syspkg's that were
affected by the problems. You could simply update the packages broken.
Well, I have not much idea on how this (will) works.
Julio M. Merino Vidal <firstname.lastname@example.org>
The NetBSD Project - http://www.NetBSD.org/