On Wednesday 18 August 2010 01:32:32 William Kenworthy wrote:
> Hi Alan, a suggestion - for "mission critical" clone one of your systems
> into a vm (dd), get it working, upgrade and test.
>
> Or clone to a chroot and do the same.
>
> Not quite 100% - but allows some peace of mind!
Hi Bill,
Good advice in general, but not really applicable to the specifics of my
situation.
Being the dyed-in-the-wool gentoo fanatic that I am, I refuse to install it on
production machines. I have 100+ of those and every one is different so things
simply do not scale. Workload would increase hugely, not decrease, if I used
gentoo.
It's my personal laptop that wants glibc upgraded. I use gentoo on all my
personal machines and the -dev boxes too - USE makes it trivially easy to
change the environment for whatever R&D is needed.
But for critical production machines? Not a flying chance in hell :-)
Too many times I've had to sort out the carnage from idiotic juniors who
blindly run "emerge -uND world" and walk away thinking Unix always works like
RedHat.
Gentoo requires far too much intelligence from it's sysadmin for maintenance
to be automated - either by software means or by human means.
{I just know I'm gonna get flamed for this now :-) }
>
> BillK
>
> On Tue, 2010-08-17 at 17:34 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > On Tuesday 17 August 2010 15:21:35 Peter Ruskin wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 17 August 2010 09:33:09 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Anyone successfully built and using glibc-2.12.1 yet?
> > > >
> > > > I see the tree just pushed an update down from 2.11.2 to 2.12.1,
> > > > and downgrading that package is decidedly non-trivial. Only
> > > > comment I can find at this early stage is flameeye's blog, and
> > > > this makes me quadruple nervous:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > And if you say that “the new GLIBC works for me”, are you saying
> > > > that the package itself builds or if it’s actually integrated
> > > > correctly? Because, you know, I used to rebuild the whole system
> > > > whenever I made a change to basic system packages when I
> > > > maintained Gentoo/FreeBSD, and saying that it’s ready for ~arch
> > > > when you haven’t even rebuilt the system (and you haven’t, or you
> > > > would have noticed that m4 was broken) is definitely something
> > > > I’d define as reckless and I’d venture to say you’re not good
> > > > material to work on the quality assurance status.
> > > >
> > > > “correctness” in the case of the system C library would be “it a
> > > > t least leaves the system set building and running”; glibc 2.12
> > > > does not work this way.
> > >
> > > OK here on ~amd64, but you got me worried so I emerged m4 to check
> > > and that went OK too.
> >
> > I got a couple of replies, all like this one - positive.
> >
> > Thanks, all. I'll start the update later on tonight and let 'er run.
--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
