[nycbug-talk] of course you've all seen this already...
alex at pilosoft.com
Mon Nov 26 14:43:34 EST 2007
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, Andy Kosela wrote:
> On Nov 26, 2007 7:50 PM, Alex Pilosov <alex at pilosoft.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, Andy Kosela wrote:
> > > On Nov 26, 2007 3:23 PM, Jerry B. Altzman <jbaltz at 3phasecomputing.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > http://xkcd.com/349/
> > > >
> > > > "If we're lucky, the sharks will stay away until we reach shallow
> > > > water."
> > >
> > > Funny, but I honestly think it applies more to the Linux world,
> > > especially old RPM world :P Anyway the dangers of upgrading are always
> > > on the horizon.
> > If you ever did 'make buildworld'...its just as painful as RPM, if not
> > more.
> Honestly I don't know about what kind of pain you are talking about :) I
> never had any problems with 'make buildworld' in Security Branch and
> that's what I use on any production servers. Sometimes things can break
> in STABLE or CURRENT, but that's acceptable if you know why those
> branches exist.
Apples to apples, please. security-branch upgrades should be compared to
RPM upgrades in security branch (ie. same underlying package, like going
from net-snmp-3.3-1 to net-snmp-3.3-2). Those upgrades don't really count.
More information about the talk