Prev: sconadm issues
Next: Can't find driver for console framebuffer
From: Daniel Rock on 5 Jan 2007 14:53
Tim Bradshaw <tfb+google(a)tfeb.org> wrote:
> I'd like to argue that, for patches that might get automatically
> applied (via PCA or whatever horror Sun want us to use this week) then
> it's generally rather undesirable that new features get introduced. It
> should be the case that it's mostly-safe to patch a production machine,
> in the sense that you only need to check that existing things have not
> been broken, not that new things have appeared.

Another problem with some recent patch releases: They may add new
dependencies.

Most prominent example: SSH patch in Solaris 9.

After applying the SSH patch I had to install a whole load of packages
(including patches) on a stripped down Solaris system (SUNWfns, SUNWgss,
etc.)

The prepatch script should at least check if the required packages are
installed before applying the patch.

--
Daniel
From: Alan Coopersmith on 5 Jan 2007 16:33
hs02(a)2007.antispam.de writes in comp.unix.solaris:
|"Daniel Rock" <v200651(a)deadcafe.de> writes:
|
|> But these are all Solaris 10 examples. I don't have a Solaris 8/9 system here
|> so I cannot check these.
|
|until Solaris 9 they had Mandatory Update Patchclusters, an upgrade in
|the same release was as simple a to install the recommended Patchcluster.

You mean Maintenance Updates (Mandatory was an old name for Recommended
Patch Clusters) - those only provided the same patch level as the update
release, but not any new packages. They went away since they didn't
really provide much benefit over just doing a live upgrade to the new
update release but cost a lot more to have yet another method to test
installation of and another set of installed bits to QA separately from
the main release.

--
________________________________________________________________________
Alan Coopersmith * alanc(a)alum.calberkeley.org * Alan.Coopersmith(a)Sun.COM
http://www.csua.berkeley.edu/~alanc/ * http://blogs.sun.com/alanc/
Working for, but definitely not speaking for, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
From: Horst Scheuermann on 8 Jan 2007 06:59
Alan Coopersmith <alanc(a)alum.calberkeley.org> writes:
> |
> |until Solaris 9 they had Mandatory Update Patchclusters, an upgrade in
> |the same release was as simple a to install the recommended Patchcluster.

> You mean Maintenance Updates (Mandatory was an old name for Recommended
> Patch Clusters) - those only provided the same patch level as the update
> release, but not any new packages. They went away since they didn't
> really provide much benefit over just doing a live upgrade to the new
> update release but cost a lot more to have yet another method to test
> installation of and another set of installed bits to QA separately from
> the main release.

no recommended clusters were always recommended clusters. Mondatory updates
added new features.
From: Alan Coopersmith on 11 Jan 2007 21:51
hs02(a)2007.antispam.de writes in comp.unix.solaris:
|Alan Coopersmith <alanc(a)alum.calberkeley.org> writes:
|> |
|> |until Solaris 9 they had Mandatory Update Patchclusters, an upgrade in
|> |the same release was as simple a to install the recommended Patchcluster.
|
|> You mean Maintenance Updates (Mandatory was an old name for Recommended
|> Patch Clusters) - those only provided the same patch level as the update
|> release, but not any new packages. They went away since they didn't
|> really provide much benefit over just doing a live upgrade to the new
|> update release but cost a lot more to have yet another method to test
|> installation of and another set of installed bits to QA separately from
|> the main release.
|
|no recommended clusters were always recommended clusters. Mondatory updates
|added new features.

Perhaps they translated differently in German, but Solaris hasn't had
"mandatory" patches in over a decade - but did used to add features in
"maintenance" updates.

--
________________________________________________________________________
Alan Coopersmith * alanc(a)alum.calberkeley.org * Alan.Coopersmith(a)Sun.COM
http://www.csua.berkeley.edu/~alanc/ * http://blogs.sun.com/alanc/
Working for, but definitely not speaking for, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Prev: sconadm issues
Next: Can't find driver for console framebuffer