First of all, I would like to apologize for breaking the thread, but this thread has been longer than most "top posting" flaming threads. Also, I do not feel as qualified to comment on the same level as the many others on this list. I am speaking a full time Fedora user who only boots Windows to play one game, "Age of Empires 3". And that is actual of relevance. I am generally a "no games on my computer" kind of guy, the reasoning for me playing this game is a bit too offtopic to go into, but I got an Nvidia card with enough juice. When I fist installed FC5 on said machine, I realised the hardware power the machine, and thought it a shame to waste since KDE could have use for it. So for the first time I installed a binary driver on my Fedora Core desktop, so it seems that I will be directly affected by the outcome of this ongoing war. Back in FC4 I think it was, a newer vesion of KDE came out approximately halfway though the Fedora life which fixed at least three problems that I (and others I am sure) had which had rendered serveral applications useless. So for half of a Fedora an update was _not_ made as I was told it was a general policy not to do major updates within a realse cycle. Similarly, when MySQL jumped to 4.1 I think it was, Fedora stayed with 4.0 for the entire release cycle, for apperently no reason other than the no major update policy. So how is it, that now when a major update, mid life cycle, which is known to cause problems is getting considered to the point of all these bad vibes. We the users have waited for updates before. I haven't been able to use and .17 kernel released by Fedora: I filed a bug report, but I am pretty sure no one cares. To break my system, would be wholey unfair, it has worked so well (aside from the kernel) issues.
From my admittedly limited understanding of the problem, this seems to
be little more than a programming problem. The parameters that would cause breakage seem to be known by you guy. RPM supports the use of post and pre scripts, can't these be used to go around this problme? If not, why not do parallel releases. I seem to remember this being done for at least gstreamer. have the xorg packages, and parallel xorg71 packages. Those who need the 7.1 updates, can switch over to xorg71, the rest of us will continue as normal, and hopefully, the entire issue will be resolved by FC6. If there can be no mutual solution can be arrived at, I vote for the potetially selfish way of just not doing the update. What ever you all do, please try to contain yourselves, Fedora already has a not so good impression among the Slashdot type crowd, for whatever that is worse. Issues like this, if prolonged will be no good for anyone. And to those that say yum needs fixing, I totally agree, there are "features" and design decisions that in my humble opinion, need adding/fixing. Other's have already pointed some issues out. Peace to all. -- To be updated... -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
