I do remote YUM updates on my servers frequently. I've only had a few problems over time, most of which have little or nothing to do with the update itself. IE, a hardware problem being discovered due to a reboot, or the reboot taking far longer than expected due to the machine having been up for around a year and an FSCK was forced. Overall, CentOS w/YUM seems pretty rock solid. Scott Silva wrote: > Sam Drinkard spake the following on 3/20/2006 7:39 AM: > >> My server has not yet been updated with all the goodies and is still a >> stock 4.2 installation. What is the consensus about remote updating? >> Would it be better if I were to physically be there and do it or are >> things stable enough that I could do it remotely and then reboot. It's >> kind of a PITA to have to go downtown to the C0-LO site, but can be done. >> >> >> Thanks.. >> >> Sam >> > A remote update works 99.99% of the time, but nothing is "infallible". You can > do the remote update, and run downtown only if it fails. You only need a > reboot if you get a new kernel, which you will probably get. The biggest > gotcha is if you are running something non-standard that an update might hose. > But if that is the case, you can always remotely fix it or try to go back. > > The risk of running without the updates can offset the risk of updating most > of the time. > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060320/98a3c603/attachment-0004.html>