Your description is basically what i do.
I have like 3 machines that basically do NAT and transparent proxying
(ala SQUID) on three client networks. I ignorepkg = iptables, squid,
kernel26 on all three of them.
Since my laptop also runz Arch, i always upgrade my laptop first... and
find out if
Thanks again for all the thoughts. It occurs to me that one never
really *HAS* to update. There's no-one holding a gun to your
head. So, I'm thinking that maybe *A* way to proceed is to
maintain a test server that has all of the packages installed that we
would normally install on a production s
On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 01:23:42PM +0100, Thomas Bächler wrote:
>Magnus Therning schrieb:
>>>Our release structure isn't like that at all. We just take a snapshot
>>>of the state of current and that's a release. The rolling part means
>>>that the difference between releases is all the updates we'
On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 10:03:43 -0800
Doug Jolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So, maybe it's not that big of a deal. In addition (although I
> couldn't find the message),
> I'm sure someone had mentioned something about the fact that updates
> can easily be rolled back. (I really wish I could fin
Well, one thing that I know some people do is to manage your own repos
I think this is a very good idea. However, after giving it some
thought, I had another idea. Since the universe of what we're
talking about here is all servers, I am wondering how much updating
there would actually have to be
On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 10:12:38AM +1300, Hadley Rich wrote:
> On Saturday 19 November 2005 06:50, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> > > I just want to say that Arch also uses BSD-style init scripts which in
> > > my opinion in not a bad thing at all...
> >
> > And slackware uses SysV initscripts - he just ha
On Saturday 19 November 2005 06:50, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> > I just want to say that Arch also uses BSD-style init scripts which in
> > my opinion in not a bad thing at all...
>
> And slackware uses SysV initscripts - he just had the nomenclature
> backwards 8)
Slackware has the functionality requ
On 11/18/05, Bozhidar Batsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just want to say that Arch also uses BSD-style init scripts which in
> my opinion in not a bad thing at all...
And slackware uses SysV initscripts - he just had the nomenclature backwards 8)
- phrak
_
Doug Jolley wrote:
> I wanted to take a moment to thank all who responded to my inquiry in
> this thread.
>
> I come from a Slackware heritage. I'd probably be running Slack today
> but for 3 reasons listed in decreasing order of importance to me: (1)
> It doesn't have a package management sys
On 11/18/05, Doug Jolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There have been some suggestions that a different distro such as Debian,
> Ubuntu, or RHES might be better suited to these particular needs. I hear
> what these commentators are saying. It's just that those distros all leave
> me working in a
I wanted to take a moment to thank all who responded to my inquiry in this thread.
I come from a Slackware heritage. I'd probably be running Slack today
but for 3 reasons listed in decreasing order of importance to me: (1) It
doesn't have a package management system that understands dependencies
Magnus Therning schrieb:
>>Our release structure isn't like that at all. We just take a snapshot
>>of the state of current and that's a release. The rolling part means
>>that the difference between releases is all the updates we've done.
>>
>>A release is out of date seconds after it's been made.
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 02:02:09PM -0500, Jason Chu wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 09:56:47AM -0800, Doug Jolley wrote:
>>
>>Well, I've been playing with Arch Linux for about 2 months now and I
>>certainly like what I'm seeing. For my own workstation, it's great.
>>However, I'm now t
On Thursday 17 November 2005 20:42, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 02:39:41PM -0500, Andrew Conkling wrote:
> > On 11/17/05, Doug Jolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Anyway, now that I'm more clear on how the Rolling Release System
> > > works (thanks to your response), maybe m
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 02:39:41PM -0500, Andrew Conkling wrote:
> On 11/17/05, Doug Jolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Anyway, now that I'm more clear on how the Rolling Release System works
> > (thanks to your response), maybe my real question is, "What is the best way
> > to keep production
On 11/17/05, Doug Jolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyway, now that I'm more clear on how the Rolling Release System works
> (thanks to your response), maybe my real question is, "What is the best way
> to keep production systems secure and bug free without having to track
> Current and expose
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 09:56:47AM -0800, Doug Jolley wrote:
> Hypothetically, let's say that the latest released version is 'Yawn' and the
> next version to be released is 'BleedingEdge'. So, put differently,
> BleedingEdge is currently under development and development work has been
> completed o
> I know lots of other people will jump on this
That being the case, let me first thank you for your comments and then make some expanding remarks.
I'm sure that everyone has this figured out; but, just for the sake of
being explicit, let me say that my concern is that updates frequently
break som
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 07:26:39PM +0100, Alexander Baldeck wrote:
> Jason Chu wrote:
>
> >On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 09:56:47AM -0800, Doug Jolley wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Well, I've been playing with Arch Linux for about 2 months now and I
> >> certainly like what I'm seeing. For my own workstati
Jason Chu wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 09:56:47AM -0800, Doug Jolley wrote:
>
>
>> Well, I've been playing with Arch Linux for about 2 months now and I
>> certainly like what I'm seeing. For my own workstation, it's great.
>> However, I'm now thinking about moving on and actually using
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 09:56:47AM -0800, Doug Jolley wrote:
>
>Well, I've been playing with Arch Linux for about 2 months now and I
>certainly like what I'm seeing. For my own workstation, it's great.
>However, I'm now thinking about moving on and actually using Arch in
>some pro
Well, I've been playing with Arch Linux for about 2 months now and I
certainly like what I'm seeing. For my own workstation, it's
great. However, I'm now thinking about moving on and actually
using Arch in some production installations. In that regard, I
have some questions about how the rolling
22 matches
Mail list logo
