With Fedora7 being released within a month, I would like to ask where the discussion of Fedora 'N' becoming just Fedora that was going on a month or two ago went.
I find it irritating (if not impossible) to have to reinstall with each new release of Fedora, and having an OS that could be continuously updated would be a real plus. I realize that during 'initial' development this is difficult, but since we are at '7' it seems that Fedora should be as smart as other distributions that CAN do continuous updates.
So, what happened to that discussion?
On 4/30/07, clemens@dwf.com clemens@dwf.com wrote:
With Fedora7 being released within a month, I would like to ask where the discussion of Fedora 'N' becoming just Fedora that was going on a month or two ago went.
I find it irritating (if not impossible) to have to reinstall with each new release of Fedora, and having an OS that could be continuously updated would be a real plus. I realize that during 'initial' development this is difficult, but since we are at '7' it seems that Fedora should be as smart as other distributions that CAN do continuous updates.
So, what happened to that discussion?
Did you look in the test or developers lists?
-- Reg.Clemens reg@dwf.com
On 4/30/07, clemens@dwf.com clemens@dwf.com wrote:
With Fedora7 being released within a month, I would like to ask where the discussion of Fedora 'N' becoming just Fedora that was going on a month or two ago went.
I find it irritating (if not impossible) to have to reinstall with each new release of Fedora, and having an OS that could be continuously updated would be a real plus. I realize that during 'initial' development this is difficult, but since we are at '7' it seems that Fedora should be as smart as other distributions that CAN do continuous updates.
So, what happened to that discussion?
Did you look in the test or developers lists?
--
I havent seen anything in fedora-test, but could have missed it. Any idea on what to scan on?
On 5/2/07, Reg Clemens reg@dwf.com wrote:
On 4/30/07, clemens@dwf.com clemens@dwf.com wrote:
With Fedora7 being released within a month, I would like to ask where the discussion of Fedora 'N' becoming just Fedora that was going on a month or two ago went.
I find it irritating (if not impossible) to have to reinstall with each new release of Fedora, and having an OS that could be continuously updated would be a real plus. I realize that during 'initial' development this is difficult, but since we are at '7' it seems that Fedora should be as smart as other distributions that CAN do continuous updates.
So, what happened to that discussion?
Did you look in the test or developers lists?
--
I havent seen anything in fedora-test, but could have missed it. Any idea on what to scan on?
Did you try the developers list? Also use Google Search.
Reg.Clemens reg@dwf.com
clemens@dwf.com wrote:
With Fedora7 being released within a month, I would like to ask where the discussion of Fedora 'N' becoming just Fedora that was going on a month or two ago went.
I find it irritating (if not impossible) to have to reinstall with each new release of Fedora, and having an OS that could be continuously updated would be a real plus. I realize that during 'initial' development this is difficult, but since we are at '7' it seems that Fedora should be as smart as other distributions that CAN do continuous updates.
So, what happened to that discussion?
I agree with you that a progressive and evolutionary path should be available to upgrade from one short lived version to the next short life cycle release. I don't like the install clean with each new release which some highly recommend as being the best course. However those hovering around with installations several release version back and then wanting to jump to the current or soon to be released versions will surely have problems. The time span would be too great and even proprietary OSes would have problems within the lengthened gap in progression and the fast pace of technological changes that came along the way since the previous snapshot version of the OS was stopped from continued support. An alternative and almost "progressive" distribution is development which is a lot more stable with yum as the update retrieval agent and other tools to stabilize the package introduction. (Yum and mock) Anyway, I have two issues with development and they are supposed to be resolved but the packages are not yest available. (dual display and disk geometry).
Anyway, as stated in the past by myself, being able to just pull in the updates, get opportunities to add new technological items to previous versions would be so much easier to deal with as a user. (A what's new package group of some sort). I know that the developer side of the equation might not be so smooth as the user mode utopia though.
File an RFE and I'd add myself to the Request for Enhancement bug report. Of course I was ignored or shot down in postings before on mailing lists. I never filed a report on the issue however.
Jim
clemens@dwf.com wrote:
With Fedora7 being released within a month, I would like to ask where the discussion of Fedora 'N' becoming just Fedora that was going on a month or two ago went.
I find it irritating (if not impossible) to have to reinstall with each new release of Fedora, and having an OS that could be continuously updated would be a real plus.
What makes you think that you can't update between different Fedora versions? I've got servers here that have done every update from FC1 - FC6. All that happens is that when a new version of Fedora comes out I stick the CD in, choose the update option and let it do it's thing. I've had nothing more than the most minor of issues when updating this way.
I realize that during 'initial' development this is difficult, but since we are at '7' it seems that Fedora should be as smart
None of the major distributions I'm aware of do continuous updates (maybe Gentoo does??), they all have major releases which then receive minor updates throughout their life. Debian, Suse, Mandriva and Ubuntu all operate this way. Fedora is no different. Some changes are BIG (Xfree > Xorg, selinux, GCC versions etc) so a concerted and well tested release is a good way to handle these sorts of transitions.
Simon.
On 5/9/07, Simon Andrews simon.andrews@bbsrc.ac.uk wrote:
clemens@dwf.com wrote:
With Fedora7 being released within a month, I would like to ask where the discussion of Fedora 'N' becoming just Fedora that was going on a month or two ago went.
I find it irritating (if not impossible) to have to reinstall with each new release of Fedora, and having an OS that could be continuously updated would be a real plus.
What makes you think that you can't update between different Fedora versions? I've got servers here that have done every update from FC1 - FC6. All that happens is that when a new version of Fedora comes out I stick the CD in, choose the update option and let it do it's thing. I've had nothing more than the most minor of issues when updating this way.
I realize that during 'initial' development this is difficult, but since we are at '7' it seems that Fedora should be as smart
None of the major distributions I'm aware of do continuous updates (maybe Gentoo does??), they all have major releases which then receive minor updates throughout their life. Debian, Suse, Mandriva and Ubuntu all operate this way. Fedora is no different. Some changes are BIG (Xfree > Xorg, selinux, GCC versions etc) so a concerted and well tested release is a good way to handle these sorts of transitions.
In SuSE/openSUSE you just change the Installation Source.
Simon.
Updates don't always work and you are often left with broken things. See my previous posts about taking 20+ hours to update my FC5 laptop to FC6 and over 10 hours to update my FC5 desktop to FC6. Maybe we do need a just plain "fedora" branch that gets updates and enhancements so one could just keep on doing yum updates to get the latest/greatest....
Wade Hampton wrote:
Updates don't always work and you are often left with broken things. See my previous posts about taking 20+ hours to update my FC5 laptop to FC6 and over 10 hours to update my FC5 desktop to FC6. Maybe we do need a just plain "fedora" branch that gets updates and enhancements so one could just keep on doing yum updates to get the latest/greatest....
This could also solve the problem of people running older versions when support drops. ie FC4
This has been discussed in the past about the issues when major changes occur and how hard it is to upgrade/update. Some of these issues may be resolvable with crossover packages but that just creates more work for those involved.
I am watching the issues being raised with the move to the SCSI base for IDE drives as one example. Changes to Gcc in the past caused enough problems.
I for one would love a constant update/upgrade path. But until that happens, I prefer a clean install as it takes less time and causes less headaches. I am just waiting for FC7 to come out to get rid of my FC4 systems.
On Wednesday, May 09, 2007 10:18 am Simon Andrews wrote:
None of the major distributions I'm aware of do continuous updates (maybe Gentoo does??), they all have major releases which then receive minor updates throughout their life. Debian, Suse, Mandriva and Ubuntu all operate this way. Fedora is no different.
Gentoo does, mainly because there's no real difference between continuous updating and installing from scratch (since both recompile all the sources). Other than that, all the distros I know of operate with the major release/updates over time model, as Fedora does.
You CAN update openSUSE by changing the YaST repositories. Then again, you can update Fedora the same way. It's just not an advised move because there's no guarantee the system will succeed in properly updating all the necessary packages.
-
clemens＠dwf.com -
Jim Cornette -
Kam Leo -
Kelly Miller -
Reg Clemens -
Robin Laing -
Simon Andrews -
Wade Hampton