separate emails to fedora-legacy-announce for each OS

[Eric Rostetter]

Quoting Joe Harrington <jh at oobleck.astro.cornell.edu>:

> > Of course, but it is recommend, and if so, for what uses?
> 
> If you're not on FC now, you might not be aware that they average
> several updates a day.  That might change your mind about examining
> each in detail.

I'm not on FC, don't know anything about their release schedule, and
no that doesn't change my mind one bit at all.

> One of the main design changes in the FC series of releases was to get
> the updates so they didn't have these issues, i.e., to make automatic
> updates possible and desirable (since RH wanted to sell that as a
> service under RHEL).

First, that is the goal of most every project.  But I've not seen any
project that meets that goal.  Second, no, RHEL was not about making
patches that don't break things.  It was about making a stable, 5-year
support cycle for each release.  You pay, in part, to get the help
to resolve problems when they occur, not to guarantee they don't occur.

>  Daemons are restarted in postinstall scripts.

That's what I would expect, but people on this list keep telling me
that the RH policy is the exact opposite (which would surprise me,
as RHL packages always restarted daemons on install, even restarting
daemons not in the package being updated sometimes).  I've not had time
to look into any policy on this yet...  Anyone have any pointers to
RH policies like this?

> The kernel-related packages no longer break anything when installed
> but not booted.

I've never seen one that did personally, but you don't get any updates
if you don't boot to it...

> Since this is the *Fedora* Legacy Project, why not set up an FC3 test
> box, turn on nightly updates, and see? :-)

Because the whole point of this is exactly as follows: Just because it
works on one setup doesn't mean it will work on a different setup.  Otherwise
the whole issue would simply disappear.

> --jh--

-- 
Eric Rostetter