Once upon a time, Seth Vidal <skvidal@fedoraproject.org> said:
> we're talking about the experienced user who is comfortable knowing what
> does and does not need a reboot.

It seems though that there is a problem with how the "needs a reboot"
option is set (and if that is the case, it should be addressed). For
example, in the nfs-utils case, what happened to having the %post
scriptlet do "service foo condrestart"? Is it impossible to restart the
daemons?

--
Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Chris Adams wrote:


Once upon a time, Seth Vidal <skvidal@fedoraproject.org> said:

we're talking about the experienced user who is comfortable knowing what
does and does not need a reboot.


It seems though that there is a problem with how the "needs a reboot"
option is set (and if that is the case, it should be addressed). For
example, in the nfs-utils case, what happened to having the %post
scriptlet do "service foo condrestart"? Is it impossible to restart the
daemons?


well nfs restarts have never been likely to work if something is mounted
iirc.


but I'm not the nfs expert here - maybe steve dickson can better answer
this.

-sv

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On 12/16/2009 09:51 AM, Seth Vidal wrote:



On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Peter Jones wrote:


On 12/16/2009 11:43 AM, Seth Vidal wrote:

you're an experienced user? You're comfortable knowing what does and
what does not require a reboot? Then why are you using PK?

Disable pk and do the updates directly via yum.

Bam - no more requests to reboot.


I get what you're saying, and it's kindof a fair point, but there's also
some utility to having the system automatically, proactively notify you
of updates.


And you can do that. Just don't have pk DO the update.

There are lots of ways to get notifications of updates not using PK in
the system.

And again, we're not talking about for the default everyday user.

we're talking about the experienced user who is comfortable knowing what
does and does not need a reboot.

All I'm saying is - we've not taken away any option, the experienced
user can do what they want.


yeah, I totally get what you mean. I just feel like there are more and
more reboot requests because that is easier. Obviously I know when/if I
need to reboot based on what I'm running. However I'm questioning the
number of packages requesting a reboot I guess.


Maybe this is a feature that needs to be addressed in the rpm layer or
something so that upgrades can have multiple effects with regards to
needing a reboot. I'm not sure how PK gets the request to reboot from a
package, but I'm wondering about it. For example, why aren't some of the
packages simply a 'log out of X', or 'restart app', or ??? PK could
provide that information. However, as it stands, if firefox is updated,
I would (under the current way this seems to work) fully expect it to
ask for my system to reboot, instead of closing FF and starting it
again. I'm not sure if it does or not, but it seems like a package
basically has complex upgrade issues, so we reboot. Are there other tags
packages can have other than reboot? Should there be? etc etc..


I am an advanced user, and manage a handful of servers and workstations,
so yes I don't have to reboot. I'm just wondering about the reboot
'feature' usage patterns I'm seeing.


--
Nathanael

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:

Maybe this is a feature that needs to be addressed in the rpm layer or
something so that upgrades can have multiple effects with regards to needing
a reboot. I'm not sure how PK gets the request to reboot from a package, but
I'm wondering about it.


It doesn't get it from the pkg. It uses the updateinfo.xml metadata that
is generated by our update processing system that is called 'bodhi'.


You can see this data using the yum-security plugin.

seems like a package basically has complex upgrade issues, so we reboot. Are
there other tags packages can have other than reboot? Should there be? etc
etc..


No.


I am an advanced user, and manage a handful of servers and workstations, so
yes I don't have to reboot. I'm just wondering about the reboot 'feature'
usage patterns I'm seeing.


And again. PK is not designed for you. The 'reboot often' solution is not
FOR you.


I said this earlier on another subject but you shouldn't be shocked that
camels are slow swimmers.


-sv

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Am 2009-12-16 17:51, schrieb Seth Vidal:



On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Peter Jones wrote:


On 12/16/2009 11:43 AM, Seth Vidal wrote:

you're an experienced user? You're comfortable knowing what does and
what does not require a reboot? Then why are you using PK?

Disable pk and do the updates directly via yum.

Bam - no more requests to reboot.


I get what you're saying, and it's kindof a fair point, but there's also
some utility to having the system automatically, proactively notify you
of updates.


And you can do that. Just don't have pk DO the update.

There are lots of ways to get notifications of updates not using PK in
the system.

And again, we're not talking about for the default everyday user.

we're talking about the experienced user who is comfortable knowing what
does and does not need a reboot.

All I'm saying is - we've not taken away any option, the experienced
user can do what they want.

-sv



True, but the default should be sensible.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On 12/16/2009 10:11 AM, Seth Vidal wrote:



On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:


Maybe this is a feature that needs to be addressed in the rpm layer or
something so that upgrades can have multiple effects with regards to
needing a reboot. I'm not sure how PK gets the request to reboot from
a package, but I'm wondering about it.


It doesn't get it from the pkg. It uses the updateinfo.xml metadata that
is generated by our update processing system that is called 'bodhi'.

You can see this data using the yum-security plugin.


Cool.




seems like a package basically has complex upgrade issues, so we
reboot. Are there other tags packages can have other than reboot?
Should there be? etc etc..


No.


The reason for this is that PKs target audience is not someone like me,
and as such no need to provide different messages per package?





I am an advanced user, and manage a handful of servers and
workstations, so yes I don't have to reboot. I'm just wondering about
the reboot 'feature' usage patterns I'm seeing.


And again. PK is not designed for you. The 'reboot often' solution is
not FOR you.

I said this earlier on another subject but you shouldn't be shocked that
camels are slow swimmers.


So basically, PK is designed for the non-experienced users, as such
everything it does is dumbed down, and experienced users should just
ignore it, using other tools to keep their system up to date.


So one last question then, in the case of nfs-utils, (ignoring for now
any nfs specific restart/condrestart issues). The packaging guidlines
will continue to require that a post update script does what is sensible
for an update, and not just depend on the admin rebooting their server?


--
Nathanael

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, nodata wrote:



we're talking about the experienced user who is comfortable knowing what
does and does not need a reboot.

All I'm saying is - we've not taken away any option, the experienced
user can do what they want.

-sv



True, but the default should be sensible.


And the default is sensible for the inexperienced user:

Don't try to explain to the user how to restart the apps individually,
tell them to bounce the box and it will be the right version when it comes
back.


-sv

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:


seems like a package basically has complex upgrade issues, so we
reboot. Are there other tags packages can have other than reboot?
Should there be? etc etc..


No.


The reason for this is that PKs target audience is not someone like me, and
as such no need to provide different messages per package?


No, the reason for this is there is not more to go on, yet. I would love
to require more detailed info on the update including if it is an
important/trivial/security/packaging/upstream-update or what not fix.



Hands are needed to help advance this. Care to lend one?




And again. PK is not designed for you. The 'reboot often' solution is
not FOR you.

I said this earlier on another subject but you shouldn't be shocked that
camels are slow swimmers.


So basically, PK is designed for the non-experienced users, as such
everything it does is dumbed down, and experienced users should just ignore
it, using other tools to keep their system up to date.


If what the experienced user wants to do is not something that PK can do
or can be configured to do then, yes, disable it and move along.


Hell, same thing is true of yum. If you really know what you're doing and
yum is in your way then stop using it.



So one last question then, in the case of nfs-utils, (ignoring for now any
nfs specific restart/condrestart issues). The packaging guidlines will
continue to require that a post update script does what is sensible for an
update, and not just depend on the admin rebooting their server?


the post scripts do what is sensible, on many occasions restarting the
daemon will not ensure that the new sw is in use and in other occasions
there is no graceful way to restart.


so your options are:

1. don't restart but ask the user to
2. restart and drop whatever connections are active.

neither are great.

-sv

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Am 2009-12-16 18:21, schrieb Seth Vidal:



On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, nodata wrote:



we're talking about the experienced user who is comfortable knowing what
does and does not need a reboot.

All I'm saying is - we've not taken away any option, the experienced
user can do what they want.

-sv



True, but the default should be sensible.


And the default is sensible for the inexperienced user:

Don't try to explain to the user how to restart the apps individually,
tell them to bounce the box and it will be the right version when it
comes back.

-sv



On the other hand I think requiring more reboots than Windows is a bad
thing...


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, nodata wrote:


Am 2009-12-16 18:21, schrieb Seth Vidal:



On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, nodata wrote:



we're talking about the experienced user who is comfortable knowing what
does and does not need a reboot.

All I'm saying is - we've not taken away any option, the experienced
user can do what they want.

-sv



True, but the default should be sensible.


And the default is sensible for the inexperienced user:

Don't try to explain to the user how to restart the apps individually,
tell them to bounce the box and it will be the right version when it
comes back.

-sv



On the other hand I think requiring more reboots than Windows is a bad
thing...


Then I can think of a couple of solutions to this problem:

1. Have fewer update pushes per release - this is something I'm actively
advocating and I think is possible


2. Match up more updates to a specific running app so we can see if the
reboot is really necessary at all. - something else I've wrriten some code
in support of.


How would you like to help in these goals?

-sv

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list