Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!amdahl!paf From: paf@uts.amdahl.com (Paul A. Fronberg) Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Subject: regarding patch level of patch Keywords: patch Message-ID: <3eCX02wo28gL01@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> Date: 18 May 89 04:30:20 GMT Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA Lines: 76 Since sending a mild flame concerning patch levels, I have received two mail messages besides seeing one reply on the net. One person from sun said that they were up to 14. mail. One person said they were up to 12. mail. One person posted that they were up to 13. posted. I think the statistics are intersting. By the way, what is the real patch level for patch. Please post as I don't want my mail box to explode. My second point about posting something periodically or with the official patches applied was inspired by the above suspicion. Also: 1. patch may not be sufficiently up to rev to handle patch file. I've run into this problem already. What happens if patch is missing or you are missing a level or two to it. 2. I believe that the total size of the patches to news now exceed the size of news originally posted. This is probably true also for pearl (at least first release) and also for rn. These are the extreme cases, of course, but with critical software such as news or patch, don't we want to encourage people to use the most up-to-date and bug-free code as possible. 3. Where do you get some of the patches and distinguish between offical patches and ad hoc ones? Some are only available via ARPANET. How many times do we see "please send me patch #X for program Y". And how many times have we suddenly seen patch #4 and are missing #2 and #3. I don't know what the present status of the moderated source groups are and what the official patch policies are. I see on archive sites the moderated issued patches are included, but I don't know about the ones from comp.sources.bugs or other groups (haven't looked recently). 4. A long time problem has been with various levels of news on the net. I remember that at one time there were nodes with 2.10.0, 2.10.1, 2.10.2, 2.10.3, beta 2.11 and released 2.11, not to mention all patch levels in between on the net. The fact that it works at all may be a major miracle. There appears to be considerable inertia in going to a new release unless there are compelling reasons. 5. The chances of a patch being missed, lost, or corrupted is going to increase as the number of patches increase. If you miss one, you may not realize it for quite some time. Another suggestion is to include the current patch level with the periodic index postings for comp.sources and comp.sources.misc. 6. How many patches are going to go into a program. I have patches 40 and beyond for rn (at least one version). At what point do we draw the line and say there is a new releaase or do we go on to patch #127. 7. The readership of USENET is very transient. New readers are constantly appearing. New nodes are constantly being added. Not only are they going to be missing important net routines posted long ago, but the intermideate patches will be missing as well. Without shar, or uudecode/encode, or patch, they will be limited in regards to use of USENET. If we can post the maps (4-7 megabytes) once a month (for good reasons), it seems to me that for 1% more (once a year posting) we can ensure that everyone at least has access to the fixed, current versions for certain programs. Note, I am not proposing something be reposted just because of one or two patches, but for certain netwide critical packages a periodic posting might be in order. Also when the patch number gets to be 8, 14 or 41, an offical posting might be made to bring the package up to a known stable release. Perhaps some sort of "kit" with the commonly requested programs could be send out once every few months? 1 megabyte or so a year would probably be sufficient. My canidates would be news, patch, uudecode/encode, arc (or equivilant), binhex, shar. In short the programs necessary to access and extract news programs/articles. I don't know, it's just a few ideas for consideration. This article is getting longer than I expected and I apologize for stepping on toes, rambling, and breathing :-)