Fedora Core 6 ROCKS ! Salute to the developers !
David G. Miller
dave at davenjudy.org
Mon Oct 30 05:02:38 UTC 2006
Ric Moore <wayward4now at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-10-29 at 20:44 -0700, David G. Miller wrote:
>
>>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> Works well for user apps but I lived through the evolution of ipfwadm ->
>>> ipchains -> iptables. Need to be careful with system stuff. It would
>>> be nice to see core functionality supported for upgrades even if every
>>> oddball app isn't. One of the arguments against supporting upgrades is,
>>> "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." That is, once a release supports a
>>> platform, why change. As with my laptop example, there are good reasons
>>> to upgrade from an OS release that only marginally supports a hardware
>>> platform to one that fully supports it. Let's hope somebody at
>>> Fedora/RH listens.
>>
>>
>All the more reason to use the old timey /usr/local system
>upgrades won't touch it. Maybe we need to adjust our tinfoil and go
>retro, the old timers had methodologies that may need revisiting. Ric
>
That approach worked a lot better before X. Something like the change
from XFree86 to X.org screws everything up since a lot of users like
WIMP interfaces. Same for any significant change to the GUI.
It would be nice to see something like:
1) Critical system functionality -> gets upgraded.
2) Common applications -> upgraded or at least at reasonable stab at it.
3) Other stuff -> install new config and save the old as rpmsave.
The goal would be that a functioning system gets upgraded to the new OS
release that, for the most part, works. That is, everything works but
it's possible that some settings are left to the admin/user to bring
forward.
Cheers,
Dave
--
Politics, n. Strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles.
-- Ambrose Bierce
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list