Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
PostgreSQL 9.3 beta: Federated databases and more
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 9, 2013
(Nearly) full tickless operation in 3.10
Various notes on /usr unification
Posted Feb 28, 2012 17:53 UTC (Tue) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639)
Posted Feb 28, 2012 23:36 UTC (Tue) by juliank (subscriber, #45896)
And if you're running unstable, things are much more easier. You just upgrade once in a while and be happy.
Posted Feb 28, 2012 23:57 UTC (Tue) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639)
Uhm okay. I guess reports like this are just fantasy right?
The discussion for this bug:
relies heavily on pointing to the release notes on how to avoid the problems encountered.
And I particularly like this upgrade bug
"Unfortunately there's no safe solution for it"
I will standby my previous statements as to anyone who thinks that live upgrading is a fire and forget process on any linux distribution. It is not..especially as the use case in question looks more and more like a median end-user usage case(with median end-users as admins) and less like a production server (with knowledgable admins at the helm making sure they do the necessary pre-upgrade prep)
Posted Feb 29, 2012 3:28 UTC (Wed) by foom (subscriber, #14868)
Now, I don't actually know how things work out in practice for Fedora, but the upgrade page says "Version updates without using anaconda - such as the yum method described here - is unsupported and not recommended!" and "Although upgrades with yum do work, they are not explicitly tested as part of the release process by the Fedora QA and are not documented in the Fedora installation guide."
Maybe that warning is wrong, but it really makes it *sound* like running yum upgrade is something that is not recommended and that is untested. While, in contrast, apt-get on a running system *is* the tested, documented, and supported upgrade mechanism for Debian. They really try to make sure it works properly for most users.
Posted Mar 5, 2012 22:41 UTC (Mon) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091)
Posted Mar 8, 2012 9:28 UTC (Thu) by kragil (subscriber, #34373)
Your Canonical-bashing is a lot better than this.
Posted Feb 29, 2012 11:57 UTC (Wed) by etiennez (guest, #53056)
Important informations I can remember reading in release notes for example: apt-get/aptitude incompatibility that could cause half your system to be uninstalled, recommended upgrade tool (aptitude vs apt-get) for best result, renaming of hard drive device (hd* => sd*), + lots of useful advices to avoid breaking things (packages you should probably upgrade first, etc).
The squeeze upgrade was quite trouble free IIRC, but it is not always the case.
Posted Feb 29, 2012 4:47 UTC (Wed) by jmalcolm (guest, #8876)
Red Hat Linux 9 -> Fedora Core 1 -> FC2 -> FC3 -> FC4 -> FC5 -> Centos 5 -> Scientific Linux 6.2
I must confess though that there are some old 'mailman' mailing lists on that thing that I am afraid to mess with. The way 'mailman' is configured changed somewhere along the way.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds