> I recently built a CentOS 6 system as my main machine at home.
> With a bit of help from members of this list, it is now working
> better than the machine it replaced (RIP).
> The new machine works so well, that I would like to convert some
> CentOS 5 machines to CentOS6.
>
> I did some research on the web and the new install is still considered
> the proper way to upgrade CentOS. Same as Fedora and RHEL.
> The question becomes, "What makes the Ubuntu developers so
> clever that they can do major upgrades through their apt based
> update system?"
>
> There must be some sort of gotcha or tradeoff involved in allowing this.
>
> Does anyone have any insights on why they can get away with this
> while CentOS cannot?
To add to Les' points, Fedora has offered in place upgrade, going at least
as far back as FC1 -> FC2. I seem to recall that I used to be able to
upgrade my free RHL (non-enterprise) versions in place, as well, but I
won't swear to it.
--
Mike Burger
http://www.bubbanfriends.org
"It's always suicide-mission this, save-the-planet that. No one ever just
stops by to say 'hi' anymore." --Colonel Jack O'Neill, SG1
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
