On Wed 3 Mar, 1999, "Graham C. Knight" grahamk@ast.lmco.com wrote:
sirbruce@ix.netcom.com wrote:
What do you mean by this? Simply smaller patches to the binary you can install faster, or do you want to tinker with the source code?
Bruce
I mean, instead of running 5.1.2P1, P2, D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, D6, or D7 (deep breath) I'd like to run 5.1.2 with the patches i feel i'd like to have.
Nice idea, in principle.
The problem is that the infrastructure that would have to be put into the embedded OS, and the system files, or into additional user-tools across admin-host platforms, would be a heck of a stumbling block. And we, the customers, would likely see reduced reliability and responsiveness from NetApp as a result of the extra work and the extra complexity needed to achieve this.
I, for one, am happier with the scheme that pertained about a year-and-a- ago where a release was tested very thoroughly before release and was current for more than 7 days before breakfix patching was desperately required! And where I got told by my SE's that we should be going with a specific patched release because they knew of problems with the main one.
Having capabilities that you don't require along with ones you do is hardly a problem, so long as they're tested and don't contribute problems into the capabilities you DO want.
</rant> 8)
Graham -- End of excerpt from "Graham C. Knight"