> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2018 at 12:24 PM > From: "Ken Moffat via blfs-support" <[email protected]> > To: "BLFS Support List" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Ken Moffat" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [blfs-support] On updating old systems > > On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 03:05:48PM -0800, Paul Rogers via blfs-support wrote: > > > > > > > > > > In theory, BLFS is a rolling release, and therefore everybody > > > > > updates everything. I suggest that in practice nobody updates > > > > > everything. > > > > > > > > Au contraire. I do. I'd rather take the time and have everything > > > > consistent than end up even once having an obscure failure over some > > > > inconsistency. Documentation is virtually never entirely trustworthy, > > > > Packages that haven't changed already have functioning built scripts, > > > > so that's just spending cycles. Packages that have, have nearly ready > > > > build scripts. That I have to go through the book to check it all out > > > > and make updates is just good business. > > > > > > > In that case, I'll expect you to start notiying us of breakages from > > > updates to random packages ;-) > > > > I thought I was being clear, but apparently not. I am a contrarian from > > your suggestion. I subscribe to the theory and rebuild everything every > > time I build a new LFS. It's just easier that way. Machine cycles are > > cheap, debugging time is expensive. > > > > I was talking about updating a current system (which is why it's > called a rolling release), e.g. fixing vulnerabilities noted for a > previous version of a web browser (so, for firefox I'm on 64.0 and > had hoped to look at building the newer dependencies required by 65, > and for falkon I've updated qtwebengine - hoping that the fixes in > 5.11.latest match those in 5.12.0). > > ĸen > -- > The Laird o’Phelps spent Hogmanay declaring he was sober, > Counted his feet to prove the fact and found he had one foot over. > -- Louis MacNeice, Bagpipe Music > -- > http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html > Unsubscribe: See the above information page >
Hello, Well for me personally, I never update an existing version of lfs/blfs. I do a full clean rebuild of each and every package. Each time a new version of lfs/blfs is pending, I do a baremetal re-installation. I also have all of my previous buildnotes on hand and actually edit my own local copy of the book at the same time. I try building as per my previous notes and update them accordingly. Of course I am not employed, so this is my form of entertainment. The time taken when you are employed, and have family commitments is drastically reduced, hence updating an existing system is, even with issues caused by newer versions most probably less time consuming than the 3 to 4 days it takes me to fully install 400+ packages in building from scratch. I know for me, that when I do a clean install and get the absolute latest of everything (for me even lfs is not excluded from me updating to the latest.) that everything that I want installed works well with everything else. If we had our own package manager and had enough people to actually have a security team, then I would just do the updates. I have tried forcing myself to write scripts and to try to get a distro independent package manager to work, but my mind just totally shuts down on that, as I detest programming as much as trying to do accounting. Regards, Christopher. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
