Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 08:53:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com> To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Survey Message-ID: <20060523083944.H96736@eboyr.pbz> In-Reply-To: <20060523120100.37D2B16A54F@hub.freebsd.org> References: <20060523120100.37D2B16A54F@hub.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Jeremy wrote: > One of the major problems with unattended/automatic updating is > that it is hard to filter them. It's hard to make a good case for automatic updates when manual updates are so easy. The main area this could be improved on would be in a daily report, emailed to root, detailing which installed ports are out of date. We do this with a shell script <http://www.roble.com/docs/cvsup-ports-rep>. One issue with identifying out-of-date installed ports is the port-version number. We usually ignore port-version-only updates because it's difficult to tell what was changed and few changes aren't detailed in /usr/ports/UPDATING. Another issue has to do with policy regarding -release, -rc, -alpha versioning. Too many ports maintainers think nothing of using -pre-release versions that are usually not appropriate on -release systems. All that said FreeBSD's ports are still the reference implementation, head-and-shoulders better than up2date, yum, rpm, apt-get, or anything else out there. -- Roger Marquis Roble Systems Consulting http://www.roble.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060523083944.H96736>