On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 04:12:47PM -0500, Robbie Harwood wrote: > Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Thu, 2019-01-03 at 22:40 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > > >> But to be fair, MIT krb5 is not known for having great error output. > >> Not being able to start at all because the K/M has an enctype which is > >> acceptable and not at all deprecated according to the documentation that > >> exists today _and_ failing in the way the software tends to fail (with > >> obscure and sometimes numeric messages) would be... tough. Not that I > >> think anyone would just do dnf system-upgrade on their master KDC. > > > > Anyone using FreeIPA and upgrading it is doing this, I guess. (Like > > me...) > > We appreciate that you *do* do this because it means others will hit > fewer bugs that they need to roll back! But while krb5 version upgrades > are safe, distro upgrades aren't something that can be tested except in > a distro context. Distro context? But we are talking about Fedora here, this couldn't be less “distro context”. Distro upgrade is a suggested way to keep one's installation at supportable release (as opposed to reinstall), so distro-upgrade path MUST be tested and working. -- Tomasz Torcz 72->| 80->| xmpp: zdzichubg@xxxxxxxxx 72->| 80->| _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
