Re: Server turned to sushi, please fix bash

[Mark Mealman <mmealman@concentric.net>]

Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Aug 13, 1999 at 11:09:59AM -0500, Mark Mealman wrote:
> > Needed glibc2.1 for an Oracle install so I did an upgrade from slink to
> > potato.
> >
> > Mistake.
> 
> Yes.  You should not use unstable unless you can handle major breakage.

Bah! Real admins live life on the edge. :)

Besides, you can't learn to handle major breakages unless something
majorly breaks.

> > Please roll back bash or statically compile readlines into it.
> 
> Please wait until we come up with a real solution.


I typically run unstable(unless a dist has _just_ gone unstable) on my
workstations and stable on the servers.

In this case I needed glibc2.1 from potato on a beta server, so
upgrading to potato on that system is no big deal.

I'd say 99.9% of the time I never have any problems. Debian is easily
the best mantained distribution of Linux out there(and that includes
unstable).

I was just shocked to have an upgrade put the system into such an
unusable state, particularly since potato is close to a freeze. It's
really no big deal once you figure out to put another bash binary onto
your system, but it'd be nice to have a quick fix/warning in place so
other admins don't get hit unexpectedly.

If no quick fix/warning could be easily put in place, then yes I'd
rather see the real solution come along than something second rate being
tossed in instead.

-Mark