On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, guy keren wrote:
>
> On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, Shlomi Fish wrote:
>
> > If we want to keep the machine up-to-date with the latest software, it
> > will have some downtime in any case. As long as we announce it some time
> > in advance, it should not pose a problem.
> >
> > But you are right that it is better to do it, before we re-enact the
> > mirrors.
>
> noet that Ilya is alerady resyncing the mirrors by now, so such downtime
> should also be coordinated with him.
>
> > True. But we may need to install less stuff if we upgrade.
>
> i dont think i like redhat any more. RH7.1 still comes with a seperate
> compiler for the kernel, right? what about 'specialized' software we got
> now, such as a given configuration of apache, and zope, and qmail? won't
> they need to be recompiled, in order to work with the new glibc that comes
> with RH7.1 (at least newwer then RH6.2) ?
>
> note that the only programs worth upgrading are those that give external
> services: kernel (to 2.2.19), qmail, apache, zope, sshd, proftpd. and
> those you have to make yourself anyway, since they never come with the
> ditribution in the proper format. the only other thing one needs to
> upgrade are basic libraries (e.g. glibc).
sshd: no point in compiling and maintaining your own. The distros do a
good job in keeping up with various bugs here, and its configuration
doesn't need much tweaking (except small number of files under /etc)
Currently installed is the openssh-2.1.1p4-1
apache: we currently run apache from RPMs. But any upgrade can probably be
problematic...
zope: Needed an upgrade, right? Anyway, there is such a package in 7.1's
powertools. I don't know about its quality and I have no idea what does an
upgrade require.
>
> i think an overal upgrde sohuld be done only when there is a distribution
> with a stable gcc 3.0(3.1? :) ) version, where the same compiler can
> compile both kernel and usermode stuff.
What's the big deal about keeping egcs around just for compiling the
kernel?
Keep in mind that the kernel people have problems with new compilers in
general because they use ugly code from time to time, and changes in the
ocmpiler tend to break that code. Thus I'm not sure waiting for 3.1 is
worth the wait.
--
Tzafrir Cohen
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives available at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
