Originally posted by sdack
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
A Look At The Most Promising Next-Gen Linux Software Update Mechanisms
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by pal666 View Postit is obvious that redhat management is smarter than you. rpm does not require reboot by itself, but some software can't survive its own reboot, so it is safer to do it in preboot environment
Just tell me at which point you threw out system uptime in favour of getting the latest software and accepted reboots as part of your regular maintenance, because this is what you've done.
And of course I must be living in an alternative universe, because what other reason could I have to disagree? Next thing you'll be telling me is that I'm unworthy of RedHat's glorious creations.
The more RedHat becomes like Microsoft the more its users become like Windows users. Think on that on.
Comment
-
Originally posted by pal666 View Postit is obvious that redhat management is smarter than you. rpm does not require reboot by itself, but some software can't survive its own reboot, so it is safer to do it in preboot environment
What are you talking about with this preboot stuff? I come from gentoo land and most packages follow a simple scheme for installation. Special exceptions being the c library, *dev, X11's xf86-input* stuff, and bios updates which require booting into POST. I only reboot because I am too lazy to type a few commands to update the kernel image on the fly and modprobe everything else in.
So what are these one percent of cases that big Management companies seem to care so much about? It's not like their flashing their board's bios and installing new components on the fly? They have a kernel subsystem for hotswapping SCSI disks not much more you could ask for.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by F.Ultra View PostWindows requires reboots since it's impossible to overwrite a .exe that is running or a .dll that is used by a running application on Windows. That Red Hat does pre-boot updates to be 100% sure that the update is atomic is due to the Commercial Enterprises that pay Red Hat big bucks to have a single and certified platform to run and to write software for.
What you cannot do in Windows is unlink a running executable. You can however rename and move (unless specifically locked), and put an updated executable where the old one was.
Comment
-
Originally posted by sdack View PostJust horrible! The fact that "Rollback and Reboot" is shown as a single option makes me shiver. The user shouldn't be given the option (to reboot) at all when working with system updates.
And stop thinking APT would somehow be worse. Any package manager can be broken by bad packages.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by notanoob View PostWhat are you talking about with this preboot stuff?
Please keep in mind that these things are supposed to distribute piece of shit software that is containerized with all its dependencies as the devs could not use the system's and so on.
It's not supposed to replace linux's current packaging systems.
Comment
-
Originally posted by xnor View Post
That is wrong. You cannot overwrite a running executable in Linux either. You will get a "text file busy" error.
What you cannot do in Windows is unlink a running executable. You can however rename and move (unless specifically locked), and put an updated executable where the old one was.
Yes you can rename the .exe and move in another file if it's not blocked as you write (lots if not all of the system files nowadays are locked however) but then you have the problem on what to do with the old renamed file.
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment