Fedora Core 6 ROCKS ! Salute to the developers !

[David G. Miller]

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