Ladies,
some of you may remember the life cycle questions I had asked to this
list a few months ago. In that time people partly felt offended by my
questions related to OpenBSD's six month cycle compared to long life
cycles supported by vendors like Novell and Redhat (for linux, at least).
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
Stephan A. Rickauer
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 9:57 AM
Cc: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: Lifecycle question [Not again!]
Ladies,
some of you may remember the life cycle questions I had asked
Will H. Backman wrote:
Any details? Binary upgrade using install discs?
yes.
Any trouble merging
files?
no. I diffed them all and merged the rare manual changes manually.
I assume you didn't have any packages installed?
three of which all I could upgrade using 'pkg_add -r'. The only
How's this?
http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/software/OpenBSD-binary-upgrade/
Or do you like to have the feeling you did it yourself?
# Han
Theo de Raadt schrieb:
The reason why I bother this list is that I am impressed of OpenBSD from
the technical point of view. I like its consistency and purity. But in
business environments or comparable organizations where money is an
issue, one needs to think about system management very
On 2005-09-07 10:43, Stephan A. Rickauer wrote:
Theo de Raadt schrieb:
That is completely unsustainable. The pieces we build upon are
advancing too fast.
I couldn't tell Linux is advancing slower.
I think he was speaking about software in general.
I don't buy into that method of
Theo de Raadt wrote:
If this is what your real agenda is -- baiting -- then you should
consider staying off our project's mailing lists.
It is not about baiting, but about learning. Learning involves asking
questions. Questions may offend people. It is not my intention to upset
people as
On 9/5/05, Giedrius Rekaius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:52:50 +0300, Stephan A. Rickauer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am already in love with it, since I plan to use it as a HA-firewall
using carp and pfsync. Problem here is just that it looks as if I had to
reinstall
On 9/5/05, Stephan A. Rickauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ramiro Aceves schrieb:
I like and use both systems. But If you are concerned about easy
upgrading, I would recommend Debian GNU/Linux (no flamewars please ;-)
). It is a very stable system that it is upgraded slowly, about 2 years
Abraham Al-Saleh schrieb:
I am already in love with it, since I plan to use it as a HA-firewall
using carp and pfsync. Problem here is just that it looks as if I had to
reinstall it all year ...
If that's the case, then you just take one down, upgrade it, bring it
back online, take the other
On 9/6/05, Stephan A. Rickauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not to mention that upgrades with other OS's are even painful _with_ HA
setup ...
As an Insitute we have limited resources in terms of personal AND money.
Therefore, I am forced to rethink any strategy twice. Thanks to all
comments -
Nick Holland schrieb:
There are a lot of measures to how the upgrade process works out. Here
are SOME:
1) Frequency (i.e., how often do you need to do upgrades)
2) Difficulty (how much human work is involved)
3) Ugency (when an upgrade is needed, how important is it that it
is done
Tobias Weingartner schrieb:
This is a systems management issue. It all depends on how you manage
your systems. Compartementalizing change, change management, etc. I
Exactly.
can recommend talking to Fritz Zaucker (tell him I sent ya). He's at
ETHZ as well (in EE I think). His team,
On 9/6/05, Stephan A. Rickauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The reason why I bother this list is that I am impressed of OpenBSD from
the technical point of view. I like its consistency and purity. But in
business environments or comparable organizations where money is an
issue, one needs to think
--On 06 September 2005 10:16 +0200, Stephan A. Rickauer wrote:
There is one thing I still don't understand. What effort is it to
deliver patches (not backports) longer than just a few month - given
that the overall amount of patches per release is low with OpenBSD
anyway... let's say you have
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 11:00:34AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
There doesn't have to be so much difference, actually. With OpenBSD an
upgrade is usually pretty straightforward. The main part of the process
(boot from bsd.rd, run the 'upgrade' process) can equally be used for
patches and
--On 06 September 2005 10:16 +0200, Stephan A. Rickauer wrote:
There is one thing I still don't understand. What effort is it to
deliver patches (not backports) longer than just a few month - given
that the overall amount of patches per release is low with OpenBSD
anyway... let's say you have
Stephan A. Rickauer wrote:
Nick Holland schrieb:
...
Yes, OpenBSD had new releases every six months, and only supports a
previous release with patches for one past release, so your frequency is
going to be higher. So, at the outside, you are looking at an upgrade
Ok, that is the key issue
Stephan A. Rickauer wrote:
Nick Holland schrieb:
There are a lot of measures to how the upgrade process works out. Here
are SOME:
1) Frequency (i.e., how often do you need to do upgrades)
2) Difficulty (how much human work is involved)
3) Ugency (when an upgrade is needed, how important
The reason why I bother this list is that I am impressed of OpenBSD from
the technical point of view. I like its consistency and purity. But in
business environments or comparable organizations where money is an
issue, one needs to think about system management very carefully, since
it
Stephan A. Rickauer wrote:
Tobias Weingartner schrieb:
This is a systems management issue. It all depends on how you manage
your systems. Compartementalizing change, change management, etc. I
Exactly.
can recommend talking to Fritz Zaucker (tell him I sent ya). He's at
ETHZ as well
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
Theo de Raadt
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 11:43 AM
To: Stephan A. Rickauer
Cc: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: Lifecycle question
The reason why I bother this list is that I am impressed
Will H. Backman wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
Theo de Raadt
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 11:43 AM
To: Stephan A. Rickauer
Cc: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: Lifecycle question
The reason why I bother this list
On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:35:19 +0200, Stephan A. Rickauer wrote:
Well, I am thinking of using OpenBSD for our firewalls. Those I do want
to upgrade regularly. Not because of features, but because of patches.
You will be rewarded by this choice; I am sure !
And still, I cannot understand the
Currently, our Institute investigates alternative operating systems
compared to Linux. Apart from technical issues we are also concerned
about lifecycle management as well. We simply don't want to
reinstall/upgrade an entire OS all half year, which is the main reason,
why we will no longer use
Stephan A. Rickauer wrote:
The question is how you OpenBSD guys handle the upgrade issue. From the
website I learned that -STABLE is maintained for only one year (= two
releases). Given that upgrading by skipping one release is not
recommended, does that mean one needs to upgrade the entire OS
Stephan A. Rickauer wrote:
Currently, our Institute investigates alternative operating systems
compared to Linux. Apart from technical issues we are also concerned
about lifecycle management as well. We simply don't want to
reinstall/upgrade an entire OS all half year, which is the main
Howdy
Debian has got more ready to use packages than OpenBSD has. I found
more applications for my engineering work and amateur radio hobby.
Upgrades are a simple aptitude dist-upgrade command. On OpenBSD, you
usually have to reinstall everything when you upgrade (or compile).
Espie has done
Ramiro Aceves schrieb:
I like and use both systems. But If you are concerned about easy
upgrading, I would recommend Debian GNU/Linux (no flamewars please ;-)
). It is a very stable system that it is upgraded slowly, about 2 years
(they whant to speed it in the future to 18 month cicle). You
On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:52:50 +0300, Stephan A. Rickauer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am already in love with it, since I plan to use it as a HA-firewall
using carp and pfsync. Problem here is just that it looks as if I had to
reinstall it all year ...
Hi Stephan,
If it's just a firewall,
Stephan A. Rickauer wrote:
The question is how you OpenBSD guys handle the upgrade issue. From the
website I learned that -STABLE is maintained for only one year (= two
releases). Given that upgrading by skipping one release is not
recommended, does that mean one needs to upgrade the entire OS
Giedrius RekaE!ius schrieb:
If it's just a firewall, and you won't need any new features (wich will
come with some
new release), then why should you upgrade? Just configure it, put the
because patch-xy has been made for release zz where I have release bb
after 'it has been in the dark
Moritz Grimm schrieb:
The result is really painless upgrades -- maybe not in a sense of
(attempted) automation like on some other OSes, but in terms of
breakages. The time saved by the fact that everything typically Just
Works makes up for the few additional manual steps during upgrades, and
Henning Brauer schrieb:
you don't have to reinstall at all. hogwash by some people here. I have
about a hundred servers in production, some are upgraded ever since 2.7
times or so. upgrade typically takes us 5 minutes and one reboot a box.
Well, I am thinking of using OpenBSD for our
I recently did my first upgrade from 3.6 to 3.7 without the cd's and it
was surprisingly simple... I would say the upgrade was less
complicated than my last linux upgrade (kernel and userland is in sync
here).
Love this OS
On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:21:29 +0200
Moritz Grimm [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Moritz Grimm wrote:
Stephan A. Rickauer wrote:
The question is how you OpenBSD guys handle the upgrade issue. From
the website I learned that -STABLE is maintained for only one year (=
two releases). Given that upgrading by skipping one release is not
recommended, does that mean one needs
...on Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 03:35:19PM +0200, Stephan A. Rickauer wrote:
Henning Brauer schrieb:
you don't have to reinstall at all. hogwash by some people here. I have
about a hundred servers in production, some are upgraded ever since 2.7
times or so. upgrade typically takes us 5
Stephan A. Rickauer wrote:
Currently, our Institute investigates alternative operating systems
compared to Linux. Apart from technical issues we are also concerned
about lifecycle management as well. We simply don't want to
reinstall/upgrade an entire OS all half year, which is the main
38 matches
Mail list logo
