On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 12:33:56AM +0200, Ond??ej Surý wrote: > While I don't exactly share LaMont's reasoning on this bug (LaMont: > even if you do upgrade daemons separately, underlying libraries will > change anyway while the daemon is running, so you need another restart > anyway when libraries change), I do agree that it's much safer just to > stop the deamon, install new version of bind9 and library > dependencies, and after that to run it again.
instead of alluding to mysterious and unspecified failures that *might* happen if a daemon like bind9 is restarted in the postinst rather than stopped early and started later, how about actually giving some concrete examples of those failures? name some real problems that prove that it is less safe to restart after an upgrade than stop before, start after. and then prove that those problem(s) (if they even exist) are worse than taking down DNS for the entire duration of the upgrade. whenever this issue comes up for any daemon, there's *always* some hand-waving about the horrible problems that might happen, but never even one single factual example. contrast that to the actual problems that have been described (and experienced) when the name-server is killed early and started later. a real-world, factual problem that actually happens beats a hypothetical, never-yet-been-demonstrated problem every time. craig -- craig sanders <c...@taz.net.au> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
