On 18 June 2012 15:32, Seth Vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > As dbus is required for various things like networkmanager - does this mean > that if a server happens to be using nm for network setup that in order to > apply a security patch to dbus, for example, that the server will require a > reboot? Well, if we take down NetworkManager, then it's going to disappear from the bus and come back (hopefully) a few seconds later. Apps / daemons can cope with this by watching the name-owner-changed signals, but a *lot* of apps and services don't bother and just go boom with critical warnings when the connection changes. > Since more and more we're relying on dbus for server-y processes it feels > like we'll be adding one more component that requires a reboot for updates > to take effect. That eats up real time and causes real pain later on for > admins maintaining systems. Any self-respecting admin isn't going to be clicking hundreds of little buttons in a shell GUI on the client machines, and is probably using RHN or yum and ssh. If they're installing updates on the server itself, they probably aren't using the auto-download and click-button-in-shell method either, but yum on the command line and restarting services at the weekend. > Either we need to make dbus something we can sensibly restart or we need to > rely on it less for server-y tasks (or both). Look at the process list of the daemons we boot by default on a Fedora 17 desktop install. On my system more than half are using DBus for IPC. Using DBus "less" just isn't going to happen. > I understand you're not working on PK for servers but the packaging > expectations I don't think any expectations are changing now. There are certainly no planned changes to the Fedora packaging guidelines at all. Richard -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
