what has 'yum update' done?

[lee]

Joe Zeff <joe at zeff.us> writes:

> On 07/08/2013 01:10 PM, lee wrote:
>> Your conclusion would have to be that Fedora can only reasonably be used
>> in a professional environment like you have at your disposal and that it
>> is totally unsuited for what they say that their user base is.
>
> No, that's *your* conclusion.

Considering to what lengths one needs to go and what means one needs at
their disposal to be able to easily upgrade Fedora, it seems a very
reasonable conclusion.

> I run Fedora on my personal desktop and laptop because I like the idea
> of running a bleeding-edge distro.  I'm retired, I have more time on
> my hands than I really want, and dealing with the fact that not
> everything in Fedora is ready for "prime time" is a good way for me to
> keep my tech support skills from getting too rusty and to give back a
> little something to the community in the form of feedback/bug reports
> and the help I'm sometimes able to give here and elsewhere.

You have your good reasons to use Fedora then, and you have different
requirements than I have.  I don't really have good reasons to use
Fedora in particular, only some requirements, some things I want and
some things I don't want.  Fedora even fits very nicely, and if it can't
meet the requirement "upgradeable", I'll have to use something else.

But I wish that it can meet this requirement.  Since I'm seeing
indication that it again will be troublesome to upgrade, I'm merely
trying to be prepared.

> Frankly, I'd not use it in a production environment, at least not for
> servers, because the constant updates and frequent upgrades can
> interfere with 24/7 availability, but clearly, there are enough
> professionals on this list who do exactly that to show you that it's
> possible if you know your job.

Like I said, with all the means at hand you may have in a professional
environment, I can see how it can be easy to upgrade.

> You seem to have a large number of issues with Fedora

It's only four issues, two of them not really important.

> and have little if anything good to say about it.

Well, I have said good things about it --- and if you want to hear good
things, I can add to them that it seems to pretty stable.  I've had a
few crashes since I'm using it, all of which were very likely caused by
some hardware problem my graphics card seems to have, with the exception
of the upgrade from 17 to 18 getting stuck at 67%, forcing me to
reboot.  That makes no crashes whatsoever on the account of Fedora,
within about eight months.

So you can say it's a really good distribution --- and you might see why
I don't just say "screw it" and install something else.

> If that's so, Fedora probably isn't the right distro for you.  I don't
> know enough about what's out there to suggest which one might be right
> for you, but I do hope you find it. One of the many wonderful things
> about Linux is that there's no One True Way to do things or One True
> Distribution that everybody has to use; if one doesn't fit your needs,
> try a different one.  I wish you nothing but good luck in finding a
> distro that does what you need the way you want it because I'm sure
> that there's at least one out there that fits your requirements
> exactly.

Thanks --- it's possible that there isn't one because some things don't
go well together, like "latest software" and "most stable software".
I'd probably be best off if I was running another computer as a server
with a few VMs on it for the "most stable and as reliable as it can get"
part and the one I have now for the "sufficiently recent software"
part.  Unfortunately, that isn't an option because electricity doesn't
come for free and computers use too much of it.


-- 
Fedora 18