On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Valeri Galtsev <galtsev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> On Wed, October 29, 2014 4:02 pm, Beartooth wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 11:44:42 -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> >
> >> ... Basically, if one thinks he knows
> >> more than system vendor, he is just schizophrenic. And we, normal
> >> people, do give schizophrenics a privilege to be on their own. As we,
> >> normal people know that if the distro maintainers had to update kernel,
> >> they had a reason (otherwise, something else breaks). So, we are left
> >> running _this_ system, even though it's stressful, still not as
> >> stressful as running "bleeding edge" fedora, right? ;-)
> >
> > What? Stressful?? Fedora??? Naaahhh ...
>
> I'm sorry, apart from my laptop, I also run servers. And services are
> supposed to be up 24/7. And a bunch of people are always logged in... You
> do the math.
>
> This is a corner that system administrators have allowed themselves to be
painted into. It's not a law of nature. Civilized organisations will always
allow a maintenance Window. In the Windows world it is not an issue.
Servers can be rebooted with much more freedom than in the Linux/Unix world.
Cheers,
Cliff
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
