kernel-headers downgrade failure

[Reindl Harald]

Am 03.08.2012 14:54, schrieb Heinz Diehl:
> On 03.08.2012, Reindl Harald wrote: 
> 
>> adn yes i installed the first 3.5 MINUTES after it was built on
>> koji on a for me very important machine
> 
> An important machine should only be updated (stable or not - whatever)
> with a complete and functional backup prior to updating. New code
> doesn't only contain improvements, but introduces new bugs and
> flaws, too.

please do not explain me my world :-)

important for me is not important for customers
if it goes down i take it to the office a make a dd-dump back

my point was that i am testing many fedora-packages often long
before updates-testing is seeing them and it doe snot help
much if maintainers say "hm bugreport, however i push to stable"

and YES the 3.5.x currently in F17 stable is a problem
3.4.7 for F16 is a security update

so until someone knows what is going wrong in 3.5 the
right decision would have been build 3.4.7 for F17 too
instead psuh blindly 3.5 out - and after such decisions
someone is wondering why people start ranting?
__________________

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806548
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=805317

2012-03-24 13:02:57 EDT 3.3.0-2.fc16
2012-05-03 12:00:53 EDT 3.3.4-3.fc17

nobody cared and fixed more than a month later
3.3.0 was a few days later pushedto stable repos
__________________

i have ALWAYS backups of all important things by having each machine
twice on different locations and sychronous and after 15 years in
this business, the last 4 running over 20 production servers on
Fedora doing all dist-upgrades from F9-F16 on them and having not
lost any bit of data in my life it seems that i know waht i am doing :-)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20120803/3f4544f4/attachment.sig>