On 05/10/09 20:50, Keith Edmunds wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 20:34:44 +0100, lug@??? said:
>
>> Red Hat are the market leaders in commercial Linux and anyone
>> suggesting their upgrade or package management is second class doesn't
>> know what their talking about.
>
> s/their/they're/
>
> The Red Hat v5.3 release notes state, "In-place upgrades across major
> releases do not preserve all system settings, services or custom
> configurations. Consequently, Red Hat strongly recommends fresh
> installations when upgrading from one major version to another."
>
> That doesn't strike me as the most practical way of handling release
> upgrades - are settings somehow preserved if one carries out a fresh
> install? Of course not, so the only way in which that appears to be better
> is that you know that all settings have been lost. Yes, I know that one
> can carry out rolling upgrades with Red Hat, but they are not supported.
> Debian puts a huge effort into ensuring rolling upgrades work, and I have
> to say that they are very successful (and supported).
>
> The above is a mixture of fact and opinion, but to suggest that
> criticising Red Hat's upgrade process means de facto that I don't know
> what I'm talking about is, at best, rude.
>
I was referring to the general "rpm hell" comment that keeps recurring
when the fact is this is not true anymore. My statement is based on
experience as a RHCE working with large enterprise handling millions of
emails a day and millions of web hits per hour. Red Hat are referring to
major upgrades and that is their advice.
As far as being rude, I think you are just after an argument so please
just leave it.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Discover Linux - Open Source Solutions to Business and Schools
http://discoverlinux.co.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------
