jdow writes:
The big question here is whether this is infecting the RHEL installer or not. I suspect install problems of this magnitude would really upset the RHEL people. The only save would be to have the competition even worse.
Nope. It won't. The dirty little secret, that nobody wants to talk about, is that an upgrade codepath is rarely used in RHEL. Nearly all RHEL installs, in the field, are fresh installs.
The SOP for enterprise-y Linux seats is to clone pre-built images. Servers typically have small hard drives, with just the OS image, and mount all the storage off the network/SAN. In that context, there's little need to upgrade. Each release just gets dumped, as a fresh install, onto a server. And, in most cases, a vendor's Linux release becomes just a baseline for the enterprise-y's internal Linux image. IT engineering takes it, adds all the OEM binary blobs for the hardware that they use, to the vendor's Linux install, then just clone that image, as a base install for all of their servers.
RHEL has very little need for a robust upgrade path in the installer. The upgrade path in Anaconda gets very little testing.
Attachment:
pgpu0tFAlPeIs.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
