Subject: Re: making 'make replace' safer
To: Geert Hendrickx <email@example.com>
From: Peter Schuller <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/17/2006 12:36:33
> > From a user perspective, I would often have no trouble taking the extra
> > CPU usage hit if it meant decreasing the chances of trouble.
> From a sysadmin perspective, it also means extra downtime for your
Except taking the machine offline for an upgrade is not necessarily acceptable
to begin with. That is a problem that has to be solved in other ways IMO (and
it looks like pkgsrc is approaching that).
Once there is a way to perform upgrades such that it does not affect the
running system (until everything is builtand the administrator hits the
switch), that problem will go away. Then all that matters is that the upgrade
*works* without having to manually debug packages.
I don't know how many people *actually* bring down critical services because
they want to upgrade pkgsrc packages, but I most certainly never would. If
it's critical enough that I can't just run a live upgrade and hope for the
best, I would do some manual screwing around with chroots or similar. As a
result, compilation time again does not affect service downtime.
/ Peter Schuller, InfiDyne Technologies HB
PGP userID: 0xE9758B7D or 'Peter Schuller <email@example.com>'
Key retrieval: Send an E-Mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
E-Mail: email@example.com Web: http://www.scode.org