mike at openbunker.org
Fri Jul 21 09:56:25 UTC 2006
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 10:00:40 +0159
Han Boetes <han at mijncomputer.nl> wrote:
> Mikhail Kolesnik wrote:
> > Han Boetes <han at mijncomputer.nl> wrote:
> > > regular releases are better for installers so they are quite
> > > up to date to start with. And for people who keep tracking
> > > updates they are not necessary, all they have to do is change
> > > the release tag and rebuild some ports and run rejmerge.
> > Once again something inside tells me it's a way towards some
> > troubles after 2-3 such updates. Double rebuild of the whole
> > system in chrooted environment sounds like an overkill, but what
> > is the safe and sane way?
> Download the iso and update all the packages the binary
> way. They're already build for you.
An obvious solution is not my first choice, sadly... After all, I am not
so crazy on rebuilding/optimizing personal workstation. Just want to be
sure this wont brake some server system =(
> > Such way a crux-current would be even nicer and simpler to
> > follow, but not shure how toolchain changes are implemented, for
> > example, in OpenBSD-current.
> > Also, they are kernel developers too, while crux only implements
> > userspace. There are ~80 active developers working on OpenBSD
> > and very few here. So the cycle period is not a trivial thing to
> > choose.
> You can think up a lot of nonexisting problems. :-)
Yes, that is my well-known vulnerability.
> CRUX is much simpler than OpenBSD, keeping it up to date and
> working while testing new stuff is just a hobby of mine, and I bet
> it's the same for the other maintainers.
> What you get in the meanwhile as an enduser is a linux distro
> that's easy to build and maintain.
Have to agree here.
IRC: mike_k at freenode/#crux, rusnet/#yalta
Jabber: mike_k at jabber.lafox.net
NIC handle: MKK83-UANIC
More information about the CRUX