Re: Fedora Core 6 ROCKS ! Salute to the developers !

David G. Miller wrote:

Since you edit your configuration files to aa great degree, do you just replace the files from the new install or go through each to note format changes? Upgrades leave rpmnew or rpmsave files, so short of losing out on technological changes, what would make one be better than the other. Merging config files from rpmsave or rpmnew files should serve the same function.

I tend to work from both ends. System stuff in /etc gets the new installation configuration. After the install is done I try to figure out what needs to be changed and "bring forward" whatever I customized. This means I tend to maintain a stable system while I try to figure out what else needs to be changed.

Sounds like a wise practice. I was wondering what putting back the previous configuration files would gain for the newly installed system. comparing saved backups for upgraded configurations sounded pretty much the same outcome. edited config files are usually saved on upgrades, so comparison with these files would be very similar to saved backup versions, except a new install will not cue you into the changed files as easily as with an upgraded installation.

User stuff gets restored and then fixed if its broken. So, on the laptop I mentioned, I edit /etc/sysconfig/iptables, /etc/fstab, etc. to bring them back to where I want while the various user rc and configuration files just get dropped into place. If something breaks, I back out the change and go from fresh. I still have the original config file as reference.

Less system critical files should be alright to do this with. I guess with no complaints, things go alright.


BTW, speaking of CDs... it appears that a default install only requires the first three CDs. I didn't even bother to burn CDs 4 through 6 for the x86_64 install. I had the ISOs downloaded in case I needed them but didn't. For everything beyond a default install, I just pulled stuff with yum.

I believe there was a lot of work by the distribution developers to get this to work for default installs. It sure beats needing disk 5 for one random package which gets placed there, if you only want a default system installed and build it up from there.



The other problems are obsoletion and unsupported packages. Rhetorical question: what should an upgrade do if a user program is now obsolete and the replacement is one of several different programs? Unsupported packages are even worse for a distro like Fedora or RHEL. I run xmms-mp3. What should Fedora or Red Hat do when I upgrade? Hint: their lawyer may disagree with your solution.

Leave it broken, the application of updates after the install is finished should allow the program to function again as intended.

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.

I remember ipchains but not ipfwadm. Anyway system critical packages should be upgraded or left intact when upgrading a system.

Jim


Cheers,
Dave



--
"I remember when I was a kid I used to come home from Sunday School and
my mother would get drunk and try to make pancakes."
-- George Carlin

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Upgrade Fedora Core 3 to Fedora Core 5 Help please
    ... gnome-updater does not offer much in the way of upgrades may be a good ... there is always nice polish on a new Fedora release. ... that I cannot because I have older libs on my system and libs are not ... may just install the new drive, install Fedora Core 5 fresh, as there is ...
    (comp.os.linux)
  • Re: Fedora 3 Kernel Panic
    ... > upgrade all upgradable products on my system, and hit Apply Upgrades. ... > Subsequently when attempting to log back on to my Fedora 3 system, ... I also have my original install CD if ... So I was using the kernel previous to these two updates. ...
    (alt.os.linux.redhat)
  • Re: Fedora Core 6 ROCKS ! Salute to the developers !
    ... Whenever I did my first clean install later on, ... Upgrades leave rpmnew or rpmsave files, so short of losing out on technological changes, what would make one be better than the other. ... So, on the laptop I mentioned, I edit /etc/sysconfig/iptables, /etc/fstab, etc. to bring them back to where I want while the various user rc and configuration files just get dropped into place. ... Unsupported packages are even worse for a distro like Fedora or RHEL. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Upgrading to SBS2003 - realistic to do ourselves?
    ... the IT Pros because we are talking about a pretty long day of work. ... A scratch install of SBS remains on of the big lies of the business world. ... server is a typical 6 hr minimum process for scratch install. ... assumption that for an IT Pro...doing upgrades is a way to make money. ...
    (microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000)
  • Re: Warning: Beware of Office 2003 Service Pack 3
    ... that none of the reg keys that the upgrades were supposed to install and ... client has a bank that sends a credit-card account file to an internal ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)