Re: [libvirt PATCH] rpm: Drop obsolete Obsoletes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Sep 06, 2023 at 08:15:01AM -0400, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 06, 2023 at 12:29:15PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 06, 2023 at 07:26:55AM -0400, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> > > I'm happy to drop this patch as the impact of the cleanup is pretty
> > > small anyway, but generally speaking I don't think that we should aim
> > > to support scenarios such as the one you describe.
> > >
> > > If someone is going from, say, Debian 10 to Debian 11, and they want
> > > to move to an even newer version of libvirt than the one shipped with
> > > the OS, this is what will happen:
> > >
> > >   * they will start with the version in Debian 10 (5.0.0);
> > >
> > >   * they will upgrade the system to Debian 11, which will bring the
> > >     version of libvirt up to 7.0.0, obsoleting packages as necessary
> > >     in the process;
> > >
> > >   * they will build the latest version of libvirt from source and
> > >     install it.
> > >
> > > Trying to jump from 5.0.0 to the latest upstream version without
> > > going through 7.0.0 will require additional steps and generally be
> > > fiddly as heck, for no obvious advantage.
> > >
> > > With that in mind, I think my patch is perfectly good and does
> > > nothing to harm the experience of someone upgrading from a platform
> > > that we no longer target to one that we still do.
> >
> > Consider earlier versions of RHEL-8 shipped libvirt 4.5.0, and if
> > we rebase libvirt again in RHEL-9, an upgrade from RHEL 8.3 to
> > RHEL-9 will need this Obsoletes condition that is being removed.
> > A RHEL-8 to RHEL-9 upgrade path is an expected scenario to be
> > supported.
> 
> That's explicitly unsupported[1]: the earliest version of RHEL 8 that
> you can use as a starting point for an upgrade to RHEL 9 is RHEL 8.6,
> which has libvirt 8.0.0.

I don't care for docs that place such artifical constraints on the
the upgrade process, because in practice many users are not going
to read that doc, and even those who did read it are liable to go
ahead regardless. I don't see it being compelling to break the
upgrade path

With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|




[Index of Archives]     [Virt Tools]     [Libvirt Users]     [Lib OS Info]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]

  Powered by Linux