yum flavors vs/ fc1, fc2, fc3...infinity
tim at birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie
Sun Jul 18 12:39:29 UTC 2004
Jeff Ratliff wrote:
>> > I'm sure the developers would have liked to test on a wider range
>> > of machines, but testing is voluntary. You have yet to propose a
>> > solution to this problem.
>> I did actually make a suggestion,
>> namely that it should be ensured as far as possible
>> that the test distributions could be upgraded to the final distribution.
>> I would run the test distributions if that were the case,
>> and I imagine there are many more like me.
> I've updated over 94 packages since I installed FC3T1 two
> days ago, including 2 new kernels. Who knows how much cruft and
> broken stuff will be there by October? It just doesn't seem possible
> to guarantee a test release will be upgradable without seriously
> hampering testing. I plan on wiping the parition, installing FC2
> and upgrading to FC3test with each test release, so that anaconda
> can be tested. If the installer was sufficiently tested, things
> like the dual-boot bug probably wouldn't have gotten out the door.
As a matter of interest, if there is an error in a particular RPM,
why can't it be corrected in an upgrade of that RPM?
> My guess is that most people will be upgrading from FC2 to FC3,
> and that's what testing is trying to target.
I don't understand the relevance of this remark,
or indeed what it means.
Note that the question was, did I have any suggestion
how the number of _testers_ could be increased.
e-mail (<80k only): tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
More information about the users