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

[Kevin Kofler]

Simon Andrews wrote:
> I don't see the problem with forcing the use of these packages during an
> upgrade regardless of what versions were on the original system.  You'd
> be left with a functional system

Not really. Things like KDE config files processed by kconf_update, Firefox
profiles, Amarok databases etc. will have been converted to the format
expected by the new version, downgrading is not supported by upstream and
the old version may thus not work or lose some settings.

> and the tools you need to update to the latest versions of packages should
> be functional.

That part should hopefully be true. Still, I wonder if it's really a valid
tradeoff.

>> 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).
> 
> So, just to be clear here.  Anyone who either has no network connection
> or whose network connection is too slow to support downloading
> potentially hundreds of megs up updates isn't going to be able to
> upgrade any more?

Fedora effectively requires a fast network connection for the regular
updates anyway.

Of course the folks who need offline upgrades could use some
hidden "upgrade" option and get to keep the pieces.

        Kevin Kofler