Mail Archives: cygwin/2004/09/03/11:58:08
Christopher Faylor schrieb:
> On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 01:49:40PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of luke.kendall
>>>Sent: 03 September 2004 02:41
>>
>>>Cygwin-specific expertise, and move on. The worst experiences, in my
>>>opinion, are like this one, that seem to come down to a broken mirror:
>>>our mirror rsyncing to it and breaking, and then people updating or
>>>installing from our broken mirror, and getting into states like my PC
>>>is in now.
>>
>>I don't think it's a sensible policy to be permanently chasing the
>>bleeding-edge of development in a production environment. I think you
>>should set up your mirror with known good and stable versions of the
>>tools you need in your environment and then freeze it, and only update
>>parts of it as and when specifically needed and after testing and
>>change control. IOW, I think this problem is better solved by
>>development methodology and management techniques than by a shell
>>script.
>
> Can I get YA gold star for Dave here?
>
> This is eminently sensible advice. I was thinking the same thing but
> every message I started to compose on the subject did not put it as well
> or as non-meanly.
I have a very different opinion on this.
When a mirror stops mirroring, the poor user will not be able to update
any fixes to his installation, and will bother the mailing list then.
He will never detect that another mirror has a newer setup.ini, because
mirroring is only pull, not push.
So he will never get to any updates or fixes.
Nobody on the mailinglist ever said that this or that certain mirror is
old or stale. Just the word "stale mirror" is common. For example to get
buggy gcc versions.
--
Reini Urban
http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -