Upgrade to Core

Fritz Whittington f.whittington at att.net
Mon Jan 5 18:39:34 UTC 2004


On or about 2004-01-05 11:36, Bevan C. Bennett whipped out a trusty #2 
pencil and scribbled:

> Chris Sparks wrote:
>
>> I'll wait for a more stable Fedora. There is too much going on that 
>> makes me very leery of adding problems to my system.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Chris
>
>
> Just as a side note, don't confuse the unstable development Fedora 
> with the actually quite stable Core 1 + stable updates.  You'll hear a 
> lot more on the lists from people who are testing unstable or 
> prerelease packages simply because those do cause more problems.
>
> That's also why you see all the 2.6 kernel discussion, even though 
> Fedora's official kernel is still 2.4 based. (Those people are either 
> helping test for Core 2, which plans on including some big changes 
> like switching to 2.6, or simply can't wait and are installing their 
> own new kernel.)
>
> If you just want a stable installation, install Core 1 and all of the 
> updates in "core/updates/1".
>
> Proposed updates move, IIRC, from "testing" to "unstable" to "stable" 
> (== "1"), as they get tested and their stability improves.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> -Bevan Bennett
>
>> Jim Cornette wrote:
>>
>>> Chris Sparks wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> Which path do I take for upgrading:
>>>>
>>>> http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/1...
>>>> http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/testing... 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> With all the commentary on the problems found I am a little uneasy 
>>>> making a change that will freeze me in the water, so to speak.
>>>>
>>>> Also I notice everyone mentions version 2.6 of the kernel when 2.4 
>>>> is still in the upgrades area.
>>>>
>>>> Chris
>>>>
>>>
>>> To get the development programs, you would use the below link or a 
>>> mirror equivelent.
>>>
>>> http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/development/
>>>
>>> Watch out for kudzu, python related programs and even some 
>>> documentation rpms. I won't install about 30 of the development 
>>> programs yet. Most seem to not break things.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>
I'll add to Bevan's comments.  I thought that RH 7, and then RH 8, and 
finally RH 9 kept getting better and better.  RH 9 seemed so good I 
wondered a lot if I should go up to Fedora.  I was pleasantly surprised 
that Fedora FC1 fixed a few minor annoyances that RH 9 still had, and in 
general is just "better" than RH 9, in all the things *I* do with it.  
YMMV, of course.  In particular, the problem of keeping up-to-date is 
*MUCH* easier in FC1.  Also, font-handling and anti-aliasing and the 
whole quality appearance of fonts seems to be much better handled in 
Fedora, although RH 9 did represent a big improvement over the previous 
ones in this regard.

I do note that I've installed it on some pretty plain-vanilla tried and 
true desktop hardware.  No laptops, Nividia super video cards, RAID 
controllers, WinModems, wireless networks, etc. 

You have to keep in mind that mostly, people post to this list in hopes 
of getting solutions to problems.  They often have problems because of 
off-the-beaten-path hardware, or living on the "bleeding edge" of 
helping to test the latest software developments (like the 2.6 kernel, 
for instance).   Seldom do the (I think) huge majority of us who are 
just running merrily along bother to post every morning:  "Ho-hum, 
another uneventful day running Fedora."
 

-- 
Fritz Whittington
They say that God is everywhere, and yet we always think of Him as somewhat of a recluse. (Emily Dickinson)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3497 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20040105/3de73961/attachment-0001.bin>


More information about the fedora-list mailing list