Re: Patch Hell in Solaris 9

From: Erik C.J. Laan (news_at_elaan.dds.nl)
Date: 04/03/04 

Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2004 12:34:32 +0200

Logan Shaw wrote:
> Kristof wrote:
>
>> IMHO SUN and others might want to look at, for example, Red Hat Linux.
>> Red Hat has done away witch patches. A system consists of packages and
>> if a package has a bug, this package is updated to a newer version.
>
> This is simpler, but is it better?
>
> When I install OS release N and I discover a bug, I want to make
> the changes necessary to get that bug fixed. I don't want to
> make other changes I don't want to, in essence, upgrade to
> OS release N+1 to fix the bugs.
>
> I have tried Linux, and it seems (as far as I could tell) that
> with Linux, a release is basically a checkpoint along a continuous
> line. It's, in a sense, a set of {package,version} pairs. To
> apply fixes, you march forward along the line towards the newest
> release.
>
> Solaris, however, seems to handle things more like branches.
> A release is a branch off the main line. Patches apply to the
> branch. They don't move you along the main line towards the
> latest. They keep you where you are, but fix the bugs.
> In my opinion, this is GOOD THING. It means I can get the
> benefits of the fixes without making major changes.
>
> I like to make major changes according to a plan, at planned
> times, for specific reasons, and with lots of notice to myself
> and to others. I do not like to have to make major changes as
> a reaction to a problem. I can't back this up with specific
> facts, but overall I have a feeling on Linux (and NetBSD,
> which I have also tried) that there is little effort to allow
> people to stay on the branch they're on and still get bug
> fixes. The attitude seems to be that the only software that
> matters is the latest version, and if you want bug fixes, then
> you will switch to the latest version, and if you don't switch
> to it, then you have no room to complain.

This is exactly what you get when you use the Debian GNU/Linux's stable
release. The Debian Security Team will always backport security- and
other important bugfixes to the stable distribution, and release a new,
intermediary version of the package. This intermediary version get a
version number higher then the current stable released package, and
lower then the current testing/unstable/experimental package versions.

So if you don't want patches, but only packages, and also don't want to
march forward along Logan's line, but only get the (security)bug fixed,
try Debian GNU/Linux.

HTH, Erik

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Patch Hell in Solaris 9
    ... > IMHO SUN and others might want to look at, for example, Red Hat Linux. ... > if a package has a bug, this package is updated to a newer version. ... benefits of the fixes without making major changes. ... I like to make major changes according to a plan, ...
    (comp.unix.solaris)
  • Re: What Was Your Experience When You First Started Using Linux?
    ... >>However Linux is a community and every LINUX DISTRIBUTION uses the Linux ... Because you are filing a bug report in the wrong place. ... I'm had to dig for strange stuff even if I was using ... >>version of a package to get. ...
    (alt.os.linux)
  • Re: What Was Your Experience When You First Started Using Linux?
    ... >>However Linux is a community and every LINUX DISTRIBUTION uses the Linux ... Because you are filing a bug report in the wrong place. ... I'm had to dig for strange stuff even if I was using ... >>version of a package to get. ...
    (alt.os.linux.redhat)
  • Re: Patch Hell in Solaris 9
    ... Red Hat has done away witch patches. ... >> packages and if a package has a bug, this package is updated to a ... > When I install OS release N and I discover a bug, ... > facts, but overall I have a feeling on Linux (and NetBSD, ...
    (comp.unix.solaris)
  • Re: Patch Hell in Solaris 9
    ... >> IMHO SUN and others might want to look at, for example, Red Hat Linux. ... >> if a package has a bug, this package is updated to a newer version. ...
    (comp.unix.solaris)