On 11/9/19 4:24 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
They are indeed a good place to start, but they only work under ideal conditions.
No, the upgrade plugin and the procedures are designed to work under "normal" or "ordinary" conditions.
Hi Ed,
To me that sounds like a distinction without a difference. But don't get too frustrated with me. I can also see it from your point of view.
So far I've upgraded 9 systems.
I have done four so far myself.
Two went perfectly. Two did not.
Most of the issue were of my own doing. named-chroot was not. Perl's modules, qemu-kvm, and buggered up EUFI was mine. Named changing the way it used its source ports could not be helped
Two server to go. But I will wait a month to make sure my server mock up has no issues or I have documented them before pulling the trigger.
Most of the issue were of my own doing. named-chroot was not. Perl's modules, qemu-kvm, and buggered up EUFI was mine.
Frankly, if you're always updating from testing you should enable those repos in their respective repo files. That way they will be used on updates as well as upgrades.
Sometimes I do and sometimes I don't. On my customers, never.
Did you miss the "note that they are specific to me" part in my original post?
Also keep in mind that what is "normal" to some people may not be "normal" to others. Fedora is an awesome piece of code with many, many different ways of using it.
Thank you for all the help and tips.
-T
p.s. both of the units I had issues with were operating, not down. This is in stark contrast with the issues I have with Windows, where the OS is bricked. Fedora is awesome code. My favorite OS ever!