Re: Recommended upgrade procedure for >1 release upgrades

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

 



On 11/18/2016 05:16 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:

(Interestingly, there is actually a way to solve this *retroactively*:
the other week I was kicking around the idea of setting up a third-party
repo containing a single package named fedora-obsoletes which just
contains a bunch of obsoletes for known-retired-but-not-obsoleted
packages. It'd make upgrading EOL systems rather easier. I didn't have
time to do it, but if anyone else wants to take the idea and run with
it...)

Ouch, such a package would raise lot of problems.

Anyway, Fedora meanwhile has such a package:
c.f. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376149

I think I've proposed at least once that we make Obsoletes: for retired
packages mandatory.
The problem with this approach is that is won't always be applicable, because the reasons why a package is being retired can vary.

Actually, I am inclined to believe only packages which are replaced by others within Fedora or are definitely dead can be obsoleted. Package which a just being retired for current/temporary lack interest/maintainer should not be obsoleted.

Ralf
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux