weird update problems

[Richard Mancusi]

On 2/8/07, Zachary Stern <rollerskatejamms at gmail.com> wrote:
> For me it IS about always having the newest version, because even though I
> use linux for work, I like to have the newest apps on my personal computer
> just to check out the new features. I do a backup before any major patching
> just in case.
>

That is a good reason and method for updates.  I also do not understand
the "... weird obsession ..." comment - but for a different reason.

There are obviously several ways to do your updates.  In my case I use
Update Manager or simply wait for the notification.  In both cases you
end up the same place.  A gui that breaks the updates into categories.
e.g. Proposed, Backport, Important Security, etc.  An argument can be
made to ignore or wait for many of these categories.  But I fail to see
the logic behind ignoring "Important Security Updates".  The updates in
question today were part of these security updates.  As a user we should
be all over those.  And if you are the administrator of a corporate system
that fails because you ignored those updates you should be fired.

The real question is how do updates in that category get released
without adequate testing.  Yes, we are human and make mistakes.  But
this is not the first time that this has happened.  This forces all of us
to ignore security updates until proven sound.  But if we all ignore them
they will never be proven anything.  Note the infinite loop.

-rich