Les Mikesell wrote:
On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 18:31, Mike McCarty wrote:
Why is it safer to update 10 packages once a month than 0.33 packages
every day?
Because packages sometimes get retracted. I like to let them
soak for a while before installation. And I don't install 10
a month. Usually, only two or three get updated. Also, when
I update, I *look* at what is being updated, and I don't always
accept everything there.
Can you give some examples of where you have known better
by "looking" at the updates than the developers who wrote
them about whether you are safer without them?
I declined xine a couple of times at least, because it wanted
to pull a bunch of stuff I didn't have installed. I have declined
Thunderbird several times. I have declined Mozilla a couple of
times. I have declined OpenOffice at least twice. I have declined
up2date every time. I'm glad to say that it is no longer on the
list of things which get updated for me. I have declined
selinux a few times. I have declined ssh once, I think.
I use yum, not up2date.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
