On 16 June 2014 09:22, drago01 <drag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Matthew Miller > <mat...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 05:06:45PM +0200, drago01 wrote: > >> > That's not the most descriptiony of all descriptions ever, but if the > name > >> > is any indication, it is just a thing which keeps the cache up to > date. > >> > yum-cron can actually apply updates [....] > >> That sounds dangerous ... updates are not really atomic (i.e not at > >> all) doing them silently in the background is a very bad idea. > > > > Yet, it works pretty well most of the time. I've done it at decent scale > on > > production machines with no real issues -- and, most critically, with > > *fewer* issues than on unpatched systems. > > > > Real issues do _occasionally_ occur, but so do bad disks, failed ram, bad > > offline updates, etc., etc. Fear over lack of atomicity is letting "it's > not > > perfect!" get in the way of real world usefulness. > > > > Additionally, these updates aren't _silent_ -- they're logged and > there's an > > e-mailed report. > > Well I meant things like: > > Admin: "OK I will reboot box 'foo'" > <reboots box 'foo' that was running an update> > *boom* > > (well actually that case can be "solved" by using systemd-inhibitors > ... does it do that?) > > Rebooting during an update is equivalent of turning off the power and turning it back on during an update. It happens some small amount and as a system administrator you are to expect it to happen at some point. If systemd can stop me from pulling the power on the system.. that is a bit too HAL for me :).
-- Stephen J Smoogen.
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
