"Upgrading"
in [General Linux]
|
From: Sidney Lambe on 31 Jan 2010 19:04 There are some very stupid people here trying to convince everyone that it is necesasry and right and good to always use the latest version of a program, to "upgrade" as soon as the next version is available. This is nonsense. If an application is working well for you, there is no reason to "upgrade" and some good reasons not to. (These should be pretty obvious.) What constitutes "working well" is dependent on your situation and needs and so forth, and has a large subjective component. I use a lot of older versions of applications because the later ones SUCK. Sid
From: Bit Twister on 31 Jan 2010 19:56 On 1 Feb 2010 01:04:33 +0100, Sidney Lambe wrote: > There are some very stupid people here trying to convince > everyone that it is necesasry and right and good to always use > the latest version of a program, to "upgrade" as soon as the next > version is available. > > This is nonsense. Yeah, riiiggghhhttt. > If an application is working well for you, > there is no reason to "upgrade" and some good reasons not to. > (These should be pretty obvious.) I say it is stupid to run an application with known security flaws. Black hats usually have working exploits out within 24 to 48 hours after a security update to an application.
From: Grant Edwards on 31 Jan 2010 23:13 On 2010-02-01, Sidney Lambe <sidneylambe(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > On comp.os.linux.misc, Sidney Lambe <sidneylambe(a)nospam.invalid> [...] >> Never had a single security problem of any kind. [...] > Simplicity is a big part of real security. There's a joke there somewhere... -- Grant
From: J G Miller on 1 Feb 2010 09:19 On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 04:10:06 +0000, Grant Edwards asked: > Is there any consensus on the question of whether he's really a troll -- > in which case his posts are just a put-on to try to elicit responses > from others? Or do his posts genuinely reflect his attitudes and > beliefs? People are not just as "simple" as that. There is always a combination of both unless a person is deliberately and all out acting as a devil's advocate, but even then they will usually let their guard fall on the deception at some point and their real viewpoint seeps out. Or they could suffer from multi-personality disorder.
From: Grant Edwards on 1 Feb 2010 10:12
On 2010-02-01, Sidney Lambe <sidneylambe(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > On comp.os.linux.misc, Sidney Lambe <sidneylambe(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >> On comp.os.linux.misc, Sidney Lambe <sidneylambe(a)nospam.invalid> > Grant? Get this through your head: I am not spending > the next year arguing with you. Somehow I doubt your ability to not argue with someone. ;) > If you don't like what I have to say, you can sit on it and > rotate. Are you in Junior High School? > With your ignorant, punk mouth SHUT when you are in my space. I'm "in your space"? Do explain. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Psychoanalysis?? at I thought this was a nude visi.com rap session!!! |