On Sun, Dec 06, 2020 at 03:31:19PM +0000, SW wrote:
> On 06/12/2020 14:32, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 06, 2020 at 02:19:05PM +0000, SW wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> I've been looking to have syspatch give me a quick indication of whether
> >> a reboot is likely to be required. As a quick and dirty check, I've just
> >> been treating "Were patches applied?" as the indicator.
> >>
> >> The following diff will cause syspatch to exit when applying patches
> >> with status code 0 only if patches were actually applied.
> >>
> >> My biggest concern is that it does cause a change in behaviour, so
> >> perhaps this either needs making into an option or a different approach
> >> entirely?
> >>
> >> --- syspatch Sun Dec 6 14:11:12 2020
> >> +++ syspatch Sun Dec 6 14:10:23 2020
> >> @@ -323,3 +323,9 @@ if ((OPTIND == 1)); then
> >> _PATCH_APPLIED=true
> >> done
> >> fi
> >> +
> >> +if [ "$_PATCH_APPLIED" = "true" ]; then
> >> + exit 0
> >> +else
> >> + exit 1
> >> +fi
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> S
> >>
> > I don't this is correct since it maks syspatch exit 1 on "no patches
> > applied".
> >
> > -Otto
> > .
> That's precisely the idea- from previous discussion with a couple of
> people there didn't seem to be an easy (programmatic) way to figure out
> whether syspatch had done anything or not.
exit code 1 normally used for error conditions. A system being
up-to-date is not an error condition.
-Otto
>
> Doing this would be a bit of a blunt way of handling things, and perhaps
> it would be better gated behind a flag, but is there a better way to
> make a scripted update work automatically (including rebooting as
> necessary)?
>
> Thanks,
> S
