full-disclosure - [OT] Re: Knocking Microsoft

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20040301053247.GB14423@sentinelchicken.org>
From: tim-security at sentinelchicken.org (Tim)
Subject: [OT] Re: Knocking Microsoft

> First of all, why would you do this?  Secondly, it won't work because the 
> port will simply tell you that it's already installed and suggest you 
> uninstall the previous version first.

Well, it didn't used to.  And if you HAVE to uninstall the old port
before compiling the new one... isn't that already broken?  How long
does it take to compile Apache?  You want your servers down that long?
Once again, I am going on old information, but back then, it was
rediculous how short-sighted some of the ports scripts were.

> If you're going to use ports, you 
> should use portupgrade to upgrade to new versions.

Yes, I have heard that helps.

> > Doesn't work too well.  Ever tried
> >maintaining systems with both ports and packages?
> 
> No, but why would you?  Choose one method or the other and stick with it.

That is what a good packaging/build system should provide.  I am not
saying any distribution has got the marriage of these two completely
right, but others are much further along.

> I guess that's a matter of perspective.  I prefer compiling to using 
> packages, because they're tailored to the system.  Packages are more 
> "generic" by their very nature.

Sure, but if you don't want to suck every single machines' CPU & IO
every time you build world...  You just can't do that on loaded
production servers.

> And who has a good system for maintaining large numbers of boxes?

Debian.

If you don't like the Linux kernel, try Debian GNU/NetBSD. ;-)

tim