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

Re: Why do we need FC version attached to the package name?

Rahul Sundaram wrote:

> On 06/22/2009 12:54 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> Not possible while we allow people to keep making updates to the older
>> releases.  Those updates quickly become version ( not just release even
>> ) higher than the static copies on the release medium and repos.
> Is there any proposed solution to this problem?

The only solution to this particular problem is to stop claiming we support
upgrade methods which don't include updates. The F11 DVD is no longer
viable for upgrades as of the latest F10 yum update. We CANNOT recommend it
for upgrades anymore. For future Fedora releases, there are 2 solutions:
either we fix the DVD to use the repositories enabled on the installed
system (updates etc.) like preupgrade now does (which also implies that it
will have to refuse doing the upgrade if it can't connect to the network)
or we drop support for upgrading from the DVD entirely (we could hide it
behind an "upgrade" boot option like RHEL does).

> We can't just continue to break upgrade paths and call it the way things
> are done.

There are 2 distinct issues:
* upgrade paths from Fn + updates to the Fn+1 DVD. Those just cannot be
maintained, we simply need to drop support for this kind of updates. If the
DVD is to continue supporting upgrading, it needs to fetch updates from the
* upgrade paths from Fn + updates to Fn+1 + updates. Those make sense to
maintain. This is what the replies are focusing on. But this will not solve
the original problem.

        Kevin Kofler

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