Bret Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>My concern is that due to the fact that I am a control freak and
>placeing the wellbeing even more in the hands of a third party is really
>scary to me.
I'll have to admit to being *somewhat* of a control freak as well. ;-)
>Am I alone in this attitude? I certainly do not begrudge RedHat for
>providing a service that can be used by the masses and I hope every one
>of you subscribe so that the distribution keeps getting better, but
>I just don't feel comfortable not haveing any real idea what is going to
>happen when I type in up2date and trust that redhat still has all my
>data intact. I hate not having the time to read souce code and compie
>all my own rpms too but this approach seems to be an order of magnitude
>increase on the trust scale.
I don't begrudge RedHat for providing this type of service either, even
though it's doubtful I will ever use it on my production servers. For
those who don't keep up with the errata items like they should, it's
certainly better than the risk of an un-maintained server being
cracked. Myself, I prefer to know exactly what's being updated and
when. I also keep a log of when it was updated and what the previous
version was installed just in case I need to revert back to an older
version, which has happened. I download the updated RPM's from
priority.redhat.com or updates.redhat.com (or a mirror) and check the MD5
and gpg signature before installing/updating the package.
>I would like to hear comments from both pro and con since I am trully
>seeking other views here.
Hope this helps, one control freak to another... ;-)
-Eric
Eric Sisler
Library Computer Technician
Westminster Public Library
Westminster, CO, USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux - don't fear the Penguin.
Want to know what we use Linux for?
Visit http://gromit.westminster.lib.co.us/linux
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
