an idea about upgrades

[Ranjan Maitra]

On Tue, 12 May 2015 14:10:19 -0600 jd1008 <jd1008 at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 05/12/2015 01:58 PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 May 2015 13:37:47 -0600 jd1008 <jd1008 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On 05/12/2015 01:23 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
> >>> On 05/12/2015 11:52 AM, jd1008 wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 05/12/2015 12:26 PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, 12 May 2015 11:53:38 -0600 jd1008 <jd1008 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> It would be a great idea if Fedora would provide
> >>>>>> a way to downgrade to the immediately previous release
> >>>>>> (from which the upgrade was performed), if the user
> >>>>>> decides (for some reason) to return to the previous
> >>>>>> release. This would completely obviate the need to
> >>>>>> do a backup, and restore - especially for a 1TB or
> >>>>>> more drives (I have a 4TB drive, for example).
> >>>>> Also, and regardless, the default F setup should involve separate
> >>>>> partitions for /home and /usr/local in addition to / and then this
> >>>>> problem would not be a major issue.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ranjan
> >>>> You are making a universal assumption, which would not hold true
> >>>> for most people.
> >>> Enforcing any rigid partitioning scheme is going to cause problems as
> >>> it won't (and can't) cover every possible scenario. We've already had a
> >>> huge flap about using a RAMdisk for /tmp (and dedicating 50% of your
> >>> RAM for it). This has caused MANY utilities to misbehave because they
> >>> were using /tmp for temporary files (as they should have) and it would
> >>> fill up because it was so damned tiny. Fortunately you can disable this
> >>> bit of lunacy and change /tmp back to a disk-based filesystem.
> >>>
> >>> The unification of /usr/[s]bin with the root filesystem is another
> >>> biggie that's caused huge amounts of heartburn for admins. There's no
> >>> easy way around that one other than having a really big / partition to
> >>> hold everything. This one isn't as easy to crack.
> >>>
> >>> Other than that unification thing, all you can do is make
> >>> recommendations as to partitioning and layout. Everyone's workload is
> >>> likely to be a bit different so "one size doesn't fit all".
> >> Fedup does NO partitioning of any kind, at least none that I know of.
> >> It simply makes use of the existing partition.
> >> It does not modify directories like /home or /opt .... etc.
> >> So, it makes no difference if such directories are on
> >> separate partitions. Someone tried ot make an issue
> >> where no such issue exists.
> > Well, much of the concerns about upgrading/reinstalling are about "losing data". I have always had a separate /home partition and just mounted it unformatted and never noticed a difference from one install to the other (since the days of Fedora Core 1). If you do not have a separate mount, installing does involve a huge amount of time. Hence the suggestion for default behaviour above.
> >
> > Ranjan
> >
> >
> Har!
> Losing which data??
> fedup has not been know to destroy any "precious" data.
> Likewise, "fedown" !!

Well, I was talking about reinstalling. There is no fedup for that. Folks like the OP on F17 can not fedup (and have to reinstall for an upgrade) from what I understood.

Ranjan

____________________________________________________________
FREE 3D MARINE AQUARIUM SCREENSAVER - Watch dolphins, sharks & orcas on your desktop!
Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/marineaquarium