> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Max Pyziur <pyz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Here is what I wrote:
>> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2012-May/126307.html
>>
>> "... It's a test machine that replicates a production server. ..."
>>
>> How would you improve it in order to remedy the apparent confusion?
>
> But in an earlier post you said it was a 'server environment' which at
> least sort-of implies that it is serving something.
The third post in the thread is the link that I cited above.
The first post in the thread (mine) -
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2012-May/126303.html
- reads as follows
" ...Greetings,
I *do* still have an FC2 box.
Would anyone second this procedure:
http://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=14052&forum=37&post_id=47945
Thanks.
..."
In the course of the discussion, I did reference that it was a backup/test
machine to a co-located CentOS box that is a production server.
But I clarified early in the thread that it was not production.
So how would you clarify the sentence of my second (and the third) posting
of the thread so that it is unequivocally clear that it is not a
production machine?
>>
>> I appreciate your and others' efforts at advice. I'm simply trying to
>> use
>> existing hardware (that's the eco-friendly approach), and trying to
>> build
>> my understanding of the Fedora/CentOS operational relationships.
>
> Fedora doesn't support/recommend in-place upgrades across major
> versions or at least didn't for those versions. My experience was
> that even within a major rev. an update could kill your system.
> CentOS doesn't support/recommend in-place upgrades across major
> versions.
That was made very clear in discussions following the introduction of
CentOS 6.x.
>> Given
>> that it has been stated that CentOS 5.x was built from FC6, and that
>> someone had already offered general guidance on the upgrade procedure (I
>> shared the link in my initial request), I thought that it would be
>> worthwhile asking the CentOS-users list to see if someone from this
>> community had any direct experience with the upgrade. I'm not yet
>> looking
>> for a recommendation for a clean install.
>
> I have seen success stories for FC6->CentOS conversions, along with
> some quirky stuff you have to to to fix it up. If you google enough
> you might be able to do that. However, FC2 was not at all like FC6
> and I doubt if you'll find anyone who has made that or even a part of
> the FC2->FC6 path work. It would be crazy to try that without good
> backups. But if you have a place for the backups, you could use it
> instead to install and test a system that will work.
Thank you; this is very helpful.
My hope is to upgrade; that way I don't have to change/specify partition
topology, and hopefully only minimally adjust the existing configurations.
I have enough experience with unraveling rpm package
dependency/duplication issues, having gone through F14->F15 DVD upgrade
that failed/froze (in the end I worked with the "rescue" portion of the
DVD and unraveled duplicate/missing package issues using yum and rpm; you
can find that thread on the Fedora Users list).
>
> --
> Les Mikesell
> lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
MP
pyz@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
