Jim Cornette <fc-cornette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Early on, I was limited in the use of the CDROM burner I had when
running Linux. The upgrades never added the parameter to load ide
emulation out. Whenever I did my first clean install later on, the CDROM
burned fine. I do see quirks with upgrading and missing out on
technology changes without a fresh and modern configuration. Upgrading
from release version to release version may be supported, but you still
suffer some being left behind. I have no arguments there.
Now, considering the complexity with modern Linux distributions and the
large size of the distributions, installing fresh each time would be a
considerable task.
Since you edit your configuration files to aa great degree, do you just
replace the files from the new install or go through each to note format
changes? Upgrades leave rpmnew or rpmsave files, so short of losing out
on technological changes, what would make one be better than the other.
Merging config files from rpmsave or rpmnew files should serve the same
function.
I tend to work from both ends. System stuff in /etc gets the new
installation configuration. After the install is done I try to figure
out what needs to be changed and "bring forward" whatever I customized.
This means I tend to maintain a stable system while I try to figure out
what else needs to be changed.
User stuff gets restored and then fixed if its broken. So, on the
laptop I mentioned, I edit /etc/sysconfig/iptables, /etc/fstab, etc. to
bring them back to where I want while the various user rc and
configuration files just get dropped into place. If something breaks, I
back out the change and go from fresh. I still have the original config
file as reference.
BTW, speaking of CDs... it appears that a default install only requires
the first three CDs. I didn't even bother to burn CDs 4 through 6 for
the x86_64 install. I had the ISOs downloaded in case I needed them but
didn't. For everything beyond a default install, I just pulled stuff
with yum.
The other problems are obsoletion and unsupported packages. Rhetorical
question: what should an upgrade do if a user program is now obsolete
and the replacement is one of several different programs? Unsupported
packages are even worse for a distro like Fedora or RHEL. I run
xmms-mp3. What should Fedora or Red Hat do when I upgrade? Hint: their
lawyer may disagree with your solution.
Leave it broken, the application of updates after the install is
finished should allow the program to function again as intended.
Works well for user apps but I lived through the evolution of ipfwadm ->
ipchains -> iptables. Need to be careful with system stuff. It would
be nice to see core functionality supported for upgrades even if every
oddball app isn't. One of the arguments against supporting upgrades is,
"if it ain't broke, don't fix it." That is, once a release supports a
platform, why change. As with my laptop example, there are good reasons
to upgrade from an OS release that only marginally supports a hardware
platform to one that fully supports it. Let's hope somebody at
Fedora/RH listens.
Cheers,
Dave
--
Politics, n. Strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles.
-- Ambrose Bierce
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
