On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 08:42:08AM -0900, Jef Spaleta wrote: > On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Dan Williams <dcbw@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > In any case, badmouthing systemd for an upgrade bug where it actually > > works fine *when you're really running F15* doesn't seem right. I > > wouldn't have had this problem if it'd installed off the Live CD or done > > a fresh install. > > Shrug, I don't make it a point to do yum based upgrades across release > boundaries so that would explain why i didn't encounter it. > > Did anyone doing and testing the "not supported" upgrade dance to F15 > bother filing it at any point? Obviously people use it regardless of > what the support policy is. I would imagine one of them would file it > as a market for other people who aren't going to follow policy. > > I noticed it wasn't list as a common gotcha on the F15 commons bug > page that is maintained to handle these sorts of quibbles. Do we allow > for recognition of the "not supported" upgrade dance in the common > bugs information as a policy or is it the "upgrade path that must not > be named"? > At least for the "not named" portion -- it should get documented here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading_Fedora_using_yum Preferably with a link to bugzilla as it would be a bug that could potentially get fixed. -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpm5AcFzeOYk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
