On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 1:37 PM, drago01 <drago01@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Dennis Gilmore <dennis@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1 >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> So I asked in the FESCo meeting how you expect upgrades to work without >>> an install tree? the building on the upgrade initramfs and the tree for >>> upgrades is tied into the creation of an install tree. additionally all >>> the future options that have been looked at for livecd creation plan to >>> use anaconda, as such an install tree really is a requirement. >>> >>> I am trying to understand how you expect things to work if you do not >>> produce an install tree. >> >> Can't we just create a minimum install tree (and don't ship an iso) >> that has everything that is required for fedup and point it to the >> "everything + updates" repo? > > Reviving this thread because 1) It seems like an important question, > and 2) I'm not sure everyone on the list understood the implications > Dennis was trying to convey. I know I didn't. > > So with the idea that Workstation is doing a live image delivery for > _installs_, how do we foresee upgrades from e.g. F20 to Workstation > working? > > Dennis, can you elaborate on what you mean by "install tree", why you > think there wouldn't be an install tree if we focus on a live image, > the requirements fedup would need to allow upgrades, etc? > > The suggestion you got in the only other reply seems to be viable to > me, but I don't think anyone here understands from a rel-eng > perspective what is required to make this feasible. Dennis? -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
