I am auditing all of our servers to see which ones need upgrades to
properly handle the new DST time changes coming this weekend. I can't
seem to find an authoritative source.
I am running mostly CentOS 4.3. Does it have the fixes?
How about Debian 3.1? I bet it needs fixes. Any way to upgrade without
touching nearly 200 packages on an otherwise perfectly running server?
sh-2.05b# apt-get upgrade libc6
<snip>
159 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded.
Need to get 82.7MB of archives.
After unpacking 4790kB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] n
sh-2.05b# dpkg -l libc6
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err:
uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version Description
+++-==============-==============-============================================
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-22 GNU C Library: Shared libraries and
Timezone
And this brings me to another big question: I could just run around and
do yum upgrade and apt-get upgrade on all of my servers. But I hate to
start upgrading things which probably don't really need upgrading just
to fix this timezone issue on all of our production boxes. I generally
tend to avoid patches and upgrades unless a really good reason for it
comes along. There aren't any security critical patches for our systems
so I don't see the need. But common wisdom and perhaps an industry best
practice is that you should be constantly upgrading and patching and
rebooting everything. So far my way has worked great and leads to
greater stability.
So which is better? Constantly upgrading and risking things breaking all
the time?
Or holding back and only upgrading when really necessary?
--
Tracy R Reed http://ultraviolet.org
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right
Q: Why should I start my reply below the quoted text
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
