Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 12:37:12 -0600 From: Greg Barniskis <nalists@scls.lib.wi.us> To: Chris Maness <chris@chrismaness.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: To track or not to track Message-ID: <440F2458.8060302@scls.lib.wi.us> In-Reply-To: <20060308100648.U67765@ns1.internetinsite.com> References: <20060308120036.5784916A423@hub.freebsd.org> <20060308100648.U67765@ns1.internetinsite.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Chris Maness wrote: > I just wanted to get pros and cons for tracking the whole port tree on a > production server. > > Any opinions? If by track you mean regularly download, compile and install all available updates, the big con is that you can sometimes break your box. More frequently you won't break anything but may need to spend considerable time babysitting the process, often needlessly since many updates are for features you'll never use. Tracking updates aggressively is a job for a dedicated build/test server that makes packages and dishes them out on demand, as needed (via NFS, rsync or your favorite sync method) first to other test servers and then to production servers.This way production boxes only get tested updates, on your schedule, for your reasons. You can best follow the "not broke, don't fix" credo by regularly doing cvsup (in case an upgrade is suddenly required), but only doing updates on production servers when: * there is an official FreeBSD security alert * portaudit throws a fit based on one or more of your installed port versions * some business requirement of yours creates a definitive need to have the latest version of something -- Greg Barniskis, Computer Systems Integrator South Central Library System (SCLS) Library Interchange Network (LINK) <gregb at scls.lib.wi.us>, (608) 266-6348
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?440F2458.8060302>