Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 09:07:28 -0400 (EDT) From: David Miller <dmiller@search.sparks.net> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Server Farms? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0005100901400.4187-100000@search.sparks.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0005091521180.44035-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 9 May 2000, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Tue, 9 May 2000, David Miller wrote: > > > related patches and secondly stability related changes. It would be > > really nice to seperate them into those which require relinking/rebooting > > and those which don't. > > Well, basically the only time you need to reboot a FreeBSD box is to > install a new kernel. I know this. That's why I use FreeBSD:) > Anything else can be fixed online, although it might be easier for some > things just to reboot and let it happen by magic. What I was asking for was an easy way to differentiate between kernel and non-kernel changes. cvscommit-all is pretty high volume to look at daily - I just want an easy way to tell when significant bugs which might affect me get fixed. I'm thinking of the way many commercial OS's release patches, like bsdi. For a server farm I don't want to: a) automatically track -stable because every once in a while it has a problem, and because some of the changes are to the kernel which requires relinking and booting. b) do nothing c) spend an hour every day watching the cvscommit-all mailing list to make a judgement on whether a patch affects me enough to warrant supping. Alternatives welcome:) --- David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0005100901400.4187-100000>