 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 16/09/2011 10:24, Invisible a écrit :
> Actually Windows is getting better at not needing to be rebooted either.
Told me... this morning security update did insist on reboot.
As usual!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 16/09/2011 11:03 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Le 16/09/2011 10:24, Invisible a écrit :
>> Actually Windows is getting better at not needing to be rebooted either.
>
> Told me... this morning security update did insist on reboot.
> As usual!
Sure. But that's because it's probably replacing bits of the OS kernel,
or at the very least it's replacing widely-used system libraries, and
the simplest way to handle that is to just reboot.
I can install an AV product and not need to reboot. (Very useful for
fileservers!) I can install .NET, or Office, or VisualStudio, and not
need to reboot. I can install all kinds of stuff, and mostly I don't
need to reboot. Sometimes you still do, but it used to be any installing
or uninstalling *anything* always required a reboot.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/16/2011 3:03, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Told me... this morning security update did insist on reboot.
And, oddly enough, mine didn't. Possibly because I actually closed the
programs in the way before installing the updates.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
How come I never get only one kudo?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/16/2011 1:25, Invisible wrote:
> On 16/09/2011 03:15 AM, Darren New wrote:
>> On 9/15/2011 2:44, Le_Forgeron wrote:
>>> try playing xonix via VNC... it's far easier with just a X server on the
>>> windows system.
>>
>> VNC wasn't really designed for efficiency.
>
> The fail!
Nope. It was just designed to be easy to implement instead of being
efficient. Show me X-Windows ported to a javascript client.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
How come I never get only one kudo?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/16/2011 1:30, Invisible wrote:
> With NAT, it can work perfectly well. At long as each endpoint knows the
> other only by its publicly routable IP address, anyway.
Assuming you have configured at least one to *have* a publicly routable IP
address. That's kind of the point.
> There are probably web servers that run on RFC-1918 IP addresses. And plenty
> of home users who do. And yet, they can still talk to each other...
The problem comes when the person running the server doesn't know how to
route traffic from the public IP address to the private one.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
How come I never get only one kudo?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 19:46:30 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> On 9/15/2011 19:36, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Yeah, kernel updates require a reboot. Other than that, you usually
>> don't have to
>
> Again, it depends on what you're doing and where the Linux is living.
> I'll grant that *desktop* linux systems rarely *need* rebooting. And I'd
> argue that if you have a server whose *only* job is being a web server,
> then restarting the web server after an upgrade is essentially the same
> as a reboot, except faster.
I don't see a need to regularly reboot Linux servers either, unless
there's a kernel update.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 09:34:42 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>> So then what's the problem? You're complaining that they're not
>> tutorials, but they're not intended to be tutorials.
>
> No, I'm complaining that tutorials don't exist. Only reference manuals.
Tutorials exist, they're not included with the OS. Do I really need to
say (again) "GIYF"?
>>> Since I'm guessing the answer is probably "yes", then I don't need to
>>> explain to you how hard it is...
>>
>> Yes, and I usually end up googling instead. I'm sure I could figure it
>> out, but I don't need it that often.
>
> Let's just hope you're not trying to look up how to configure Internet
> access...
I've managed to do that enough times that it generally isn't something I
need to look up these days. But if I did, a quick trip to my public
library to use one of their computers to do the search will in fact solve
that problem.
Or I could use my phone.
Or I could use another of my systems here.
>> It might be easier now, yes. Honestly, I've never even looked for a
>> CHAP- based authentication mechanism for ssh.
>
> No, I mean, I might be remembering this wrong.
That's certainly possible.
>>>> A sample size of 3 isn't exactly data supporting "commonly used".
>>>
>>> It's infinity times larger than a sample size of zero. ;-)
>>
>> Sure, but not mathematically significant.
>
> Not /statistically/ significant, if you want to be picky.
Statistics is a branch of mathematics. :P
>>> Imagine it: Going to all the trouble of setting up a secure system,
>>> and not even knowing how to secure it properly...
>>
>> I don't have to - I see it fairly regularly.
>
> This is the real WTF...
People who work in IT have not had to learn as much these days as they
did 20 years ago. That means they set up systems and often don't have
the knowledge or skills to properly secure a system.
And the first thing to get cut from IT budgets is funding for training,
usually. Training that could actually resolve some of those security
issues by having competent staff.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/16/2011 9:54, Jim Henderson wrote:
> I don't see a need to regularly reboot Linux servers either, unless
> there's a kernel update.
So when the memory leak in your Linux-based wireless access point crashes
your machine, what do you do? When your cable box no longer synchronizes
with the cable provider, or you get a new configuration pushed to your cable
modem from the head end, what do you do? When you update the PRL on your
android phone, what happens after the new PRL is stored?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
How come I never get only one kudo?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 16/09/2011 5:57 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Training that could actually resolve some of those security
> issues by having competent staff.
You're asking a lot there, Jim. ;-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2011-09-15 22:10, Darren New a écrit :
> On 9/15/2011 18:19, Francois Labreque wrote:
>> Heathen! Linux machines do not need to be rebooted. Ever.
>
> I'm pretty sure you're wrong on that one.
>
A previous version of that post had a smiley at the end. I guess it got
lost during the vetting process.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
