Yum upgrade vs preupgrade - readahead etc

[Jon Ciesla]

> On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 16:39 +0100, Jonathan Roberts wrote:
>> 2008/10/20 Jeremy Katz <katzj at redhat.com>:
>> > On Sun, 2008-10-19 at 10:04 +0100, Jonathan Roberts wrote:
>> >> After yum upgrading my way to F10 from F9, the experience as already
>> >> reported was pretty painless. The only problem is that some packages,
>> >> key to Fedora 10 features, do not get picked up with the update. e.g.
>> >> readahead, and grub doesn't seem to have been updated either.
>> >>
>> >> A few questions:
>> >>
>> >> * Would the same problem occur if I'd used preupgrade?
>> >
>> > The bootloader gets reinstalled on upgrade (via preupgrade or just a
>> > usual anaconda upgrade).  New packages, though, don't get pulled in
>> > because it's too hard to tell _which_ new packages someone might want.
>> > And even more the case with something like readahead which existed in
>> > the past.
>>
>> I'm not particularly knowledgable about this, so it's a bit of a shot
>> in the dark but...
>>
>> Would it be possible to reference some kind of package manifest that
>> defines the default package set of a release from preupgrade? It could
>> then compare the currently installed packages to that list,
>> upgrade/reinstall packages that are on both lists, and install
>> packages that are only on the new package manifest?
>>
>> There's probably a million reasons why that's a bad idea, but I'd be
>> interested to hear a couple of them at least...
>
> Package splits, package renames, going between multiple releases to name
> a few.  The single biggest objective behind an upgrade is "move to newer
> version of stuff, try to disrupt as little as possible".

Ideally, proper rpm Provides/Obsoletes and EVR maintainance will allow yum
to do this.  In my experience from RH-9 to the present, it generally
works.

> Jeremy
>
> --
> fedora-test-list mailing list
> fedora-test-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe:
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
>


-- 
novus ordo absurdum