Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 5:13 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>>> It's getting so keeping systems up to date with current patches is
>>> incompatible with reasonable uptime goals. More and more upgrades
>>> require a reboot, and even reading the CVE data
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>
> Until you reboot, some updates are not installed, they're just sitting
> there in a disabled state. It's the reboot process that commits the
> change.
It is almost what happens on Fedora with preupgrade.
But for Fedora this is only used to do huge changes to the sys
Ed Greshko wrote:
> Or, is it only Windows 7 that now eliminates the need to go through the
> process?
Windows 7 is far from immune to this process.
It goes through the same process of installing a bit then reboot to
finish the install only to see more come up the next time around.
--
users mai
David wrote:
>Sent: Aug 22, 2010 11:36 PM
>To: Greg Leonard
>Subject: Re: Fedora updates getting more like Windows every day
>
>On 8/23/2010 2:17 AM, Tim wrote:
>More FUD. Windows updates will 'complete' before a reboot it necessary.
>A reboot is the easy, f
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 00:40 -0700, Brian Mury wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 14:37 +0930, Tim wrote:
> > At least, with us, you generally only have to reboot to use the
> update.
> > You can stay on the prior one, in the meantime. Unlike Windows,
> which
> > often has to reboot, you can't keep on
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 15:29 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 08/23/2010 02:36 PM, David wrote:
> > On 8/23/2010 2:17 AM, Tim wrote:
> >> Tim:
> At least, with us, you generally only have to reboot to use the
> update. You can stay on the prior one, in the meantime. Unlike
> Windows, wh
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 02:36 -0400, David wrote:
> More FUD. Windows updates will 'complete' before a reboot it
> necessary.
Bullshit, utter bullshit. I've *had* to go through this on several
times, as in HAD NO OPTION TO AVOID IT. And that's with Windows 2000
and Vista.
--
[...@localhost ~]$ u
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 00:40 -0700, Brian Mury wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 14:37 +0930, Tim wrote:
> > At least, with us, you generally only have to reboot to use the update.
> > You can stay on the prior one, in the meantime. Unlike Windows, which
> > often has to reboot, you can't keep on usi
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 14:37 +0930, Tim wrote:
> At least, with us, you generally only have to reboot to use the update.
> You can stay on the prior one, in the meantime. Unlike Windows, which
> often has to reboot, you can't keep on using the computer, or other
> things won't install until you reb
On Sun, 2010-08-22 at 15:40 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> I don't use package-kit, but yum-utils contains a clever little Python
> script called needs-restarting which you can run after updating:
Very useful - thank you very much!
Brian
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 08/23/2010 02:36 PM, David wrote:
> On 8/23/2010 2:17 AM, Tim wrote:
>> Tim:
At least, with us, you generally only have to reboot to use the
update. You can stay on the prior one, in the meantime. Unlike
Windows, which often has to reboot, you can't keep on using the
comput
On 8/23/2010 2:17 AM, Tim wrote:
> Tim:
>>> At least, with us, you generally only have to reboot to use the
>>> update. You can stay on the prior one, in the meantime. Unlike
>>> Windows, which often has to reboot, you can't keep on using the
>>> computer, or other things won't install until you r
Tim:
>> At least, with us, you generally only have to reboot to use the
>> update. You can stay on the prior one, in the meantime. Unlike
>> Windows, which often has to reboot, you can't keep on using the
>> computer, or other things won't install until you reboot.
David:
> This is mostly FUD by
On 8/23/2010 1:07 AM, Tim wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-08-22 at 10:17 -0700, Brian Mury wrote:
>> package-kit more often than not tells me I must reboot after
>> installing updates. Perhaps it is being over-zealous, but I agree
>> with the OP that it makes updates feel a lot like Windows.
>
> At least, w
On Sun, 2010-08-22 at 10:17 -0700, Brian Mury wrote:
> package-kit more often than not tells me I must reboot after
> installing updates. Perhaps it is being over-zealous, but I agree
> with the OP that it makes updates feel a lot like Windows.
At least, with us, you generally only have to reboot
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 3:17 AM, Brian Mury wrote:
>
> If an update requires a service restart, it would be nice if package-kit
> would tell me that, instead of telling me a reboot is required. Even
> nicer would be if it would restart the service for me :-).
>
I have had very good experiences wi
On Sun, 2010-08-22 at 16:05 -0500, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> It would be nice if we could have a yum option which says
> skip-needs-reboot. Then we could only get updates that need reboot
> when we wanted those while updating the others more regularly. Perhaps
> that is what your python script does.
On Sun, 2010-08-22 at 16:05 -0500, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > I don't use package-kit, but yum-utils contains a clever little
> Python
> > script called needs-restarting which you can run after updating:
> >
> > """Report a list of process ids of programs that started
> > runnin
On 22/08/10 22:05, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
>>
>> I don't use package-kit, but yum-utils contains a clever little Python
>> script called needs-restarting which you can run after updating:
>>
>> poc
>
>
> How does one get this? yum install what?
>
I believe "yum install yum-utils"
--
Regards,
Fran
On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 15:40:37 -0430 "Patrick O'Callaghan"
wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-08-22 at 10:17 -0700, Brian Mury wrote:
> > If an update requires a service restart, it would be nice if
> > package-kit
> > would tell me that, instead of telling me a reboot is required. Even
> > nicer would be if it
On Sun, 2010-08-22 at 10:17 -0700, Brian Mury wrote:
> If an update requires a service restart, it would be nice if
> package-kit
> would tell me that, instead of telling me a reboot is required. Even
> nicer would be if it would restart the service for me :-).
I don't use package-kit, but yum-uti
Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 5:13 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>> It's getting so keeping systems up to date with current patches is
>> incompatible with reasonable uptime goals. More and more upgrades
>> require a reboot, and even reading the CVE data behind the update it's
>>
Chris Smart wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>> It's getting so keeping systems up to date with current patches is
>> incompatible with reasonable uptime goals. More and more upgrades
>> require a reboot, and even reading the CVE data behind the update it's
>> not alw
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 10:47 PM, Brian Mury wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-08-22 at 10:37 +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> > If it is not a kernel update then it will most likely not require
> > a reboot. Everything else can be made functional through a service
> > restart at most.
>
> Perhaps. However,
On Sun, 2010-08-22 at 10:37 +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> If it is not a kernel update then it will most likely not require
> a reboot. Everything else can be made functional through a service
> restart at most.
Perhaps. However, package-kit more often than not tells me I must reboot
after in
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> It's getting so keeping systems up to date with current patches is
> incompatible with reasonable uptime goals. More and more upgrades
> require a reboot, and even reading the CVE data behind the update it's
> not always possible to tell if a
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 5:13 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> It's getting so keeping systems up to date with current patches is
> incompatible with reasonable uptime goals. More and more upgrades
> require a reboot, and even reading the CVE data behind the update it's
> not always possible to tell if a
Dave Stevens wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 17, 2010 09:03:28 pm James McKenzie wrote:
>
>> Bill Davidsen wrote:
>>
>>> Remember the old joke GIF image, with the box which said
>>>
>>> you have moved your mouse
>>> in order for this change to be effective you must reboot your system
>>>
>>
On Tuesday, August 17, 2010 09:03:28 pm James McKenzie wrote:
> Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > Remember the old joke GIF image, with the box which said
> >
> > you have moved your mouse
> > in order for this change to be effective you must reboot your system
> >
> > > I've been through this discuss
Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Remember the old joke GIF image, with the box which said
>
> you have moved your mouse
> in order for this change to be effective you must reboot your system
>
> It's getting so keeping systems up to date with current patches is
> incompatible with reasonable uptime goal
Remember the old joke GIF image, with the box which said
you have moved your mouse
in order for this change to be effective you must reboot your system
It's getting so keeping systems up to date with current patches is
incompatible with reasonable uptime goals. More and more upgrades
requir
31 matches
Mail list logo
