On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 18:17:17 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> On 1/8/24 17:55, Goetz T. Fischer wrote:
>> hi again,
>>
>> i tried to run something compiled with sunpro on solaris 11 on indiana and
>> it almost worked. i put the
>> additional libs in place and everything looked fine. however,
On 1/8/24 17:55, Goetz T. Fischer wrote:
hi again,
i tried to run something compiled with sunpro on solaris 11 on indiana and it
almost worked. i put the
additional libs in place and everything looked fine. however, running the
program in question failed
with:
ld.so.1: prog: fatal: prog:
> On 8. Jan 2024, at 09:56, Goetz T. Fischer wrote:
>
> of course but that raises the question why new libs would require a reboot.
> the worst that could happen
> is that programs which depend on that lib would crash if they're restarted.
> but if they're also updated,
> then the next
hi again,
i tried to run something compiled with sunpro on solaris 11 on indiana and it
almost worked. i put the
additional libs in place and everything looked fine. however, running the
program in question failed
with:
ld.so.1: prog: fatal: prog: hardware capability (CA_SUNW_HW_2)
i'm aware of the disadvantages but i'd like to have the choice to do so anyway
if/when i see fit.
On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 10:22:43 +0200, Toomas Soome via openindiana-discuss wrote:
> reboot is needed to verify your setup is still working as supposed after an
> update. You can have
> different kind
On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:27:32AM +0100, Goetz T. Fischer wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 10:03:47 +0100, Marcel Telka wrote:
> > OTOH, system/library in OI (and also the rest of "kernel" - the
> > illumos-gate) is rebuild once a day and almost all pacakges depends on
> > them (either directly or
Hi Mathew
On 08.01.24 04:40, Matthew R. Trower wrote:
Well, I'd be willing to commit time towards such an effort. I'd
certainly rather commit that time to the main project, than maintain my
own private fork. We'd need to discuss what the workload is, what I can
help with, and whether that
On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:59:05AM +0100, Goetz T. Fischer wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 10:49:37 +0100, Marcel Telka wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:27:32AM +0100, Goetz T. Fischer wrote:
> >> which would mean pretty much every update needs a reboot.
> >
> > If you need to be always
On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 11:52:25AM +0100, Goetz T. Fischer wrote:
> no sorry, i wasn't clear. not one isolated package of course but whatever
> "pkg update some_great_app"
> triggers.
No, you were clear. My "ssh only and nothing else" as an example was
confusing. I meant ssh (and all tightly
On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 at 00:54, Goetz T. Fischer wrote:
> i'm aware of the disadvantages but i'd like to have the choice to do so
> anyway if/when i see fit.
If you're looking for a server-centric distribution that produces
critical bug and security updates without the constant churn, you
should
On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 10:03:47 +0100, Marcel Telka wrote:
> OTOH, system/library in OI (and also the rest of "kernel" - the
> illumos-gate) is rebuild once a day and almost all pacakges depends on
> them (either directly or indirectly).
which would mean pretty much every update needs a reboot.
how
On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 10:49:37 +0100, Marcel Telka wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:27:32AM +0100, Goetz T. Fischer wrote:
>> which would mean pretty much every update needs a reboot.
>
> If you need to be always up-to-date. All the time and with all packages
> available then yes, you need to
no sorry, i wasn't clear. not one isolated package of course but whatever "pkg
update some_great_app"
triggers.
the idea is to limit the updates to what i deem sensitive and whatever else
those updates drag in with
them is fine. reboots included because it would likely not be as often as doing
fair, that's good enough for me. much thanks for all the great info !!
On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 12:22:20 +0100, Marcel Telka wrote:
> Sure. It should somehow (and usually) work, modulo the
> userland-incorporation warning in my previous mail. So it is
> discouraged.
On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 08:56:30AM +0100, Goetz T. Fischer wrote:
> of course but that raises the question why new libs would require a reboot.
> the worst that could happen
New libs does not require reboot on their own. The problem is with
system/library only (and few other similar). The
well, looking at their release notes
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/omniosorg/omnios-build/r151046/doc/ReleaseNotes.md
1 reboot per month on average. that i can do with indiana as well.
On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 01:23:28 -0800, Joshua M. Clulow via openindiana-discuss
wrote:
> If you're looking for
On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:48:30AM +0100, Goetz T. Fischer wrote:
> well, looking at their release notes
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/omniosorg/omnios-build/r151046/doc/ReleaseNotes.md
> 1 reboot per month on average. that i can do with indiana as well.
If you really need very long
sure, that's fine. if the package i selected for an update does require a
reboot then so be it. the idea
is just to avoid reboots for things i don't necessarily need to be up to date.
how much that would reduce reboots ... not sure, but maybe it would save some.
On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 12:05:46
On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 12:13:48PM +0100, Goetz T. Fischer wrote:
> sure, that's fine. if the package i selected for an update does require a
> reboot then so be it. the idea
> is just to avoid reboots for things i don't necessarily need to be up to date.
> how much that would reduce reboots ...
19 matches
Mail list logo
