FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-10-2008, 05:08 PM
"Pavel Shevchuk"
 
Default Proposal: Rolling Release

I was ArchLinux user for 2.5 years before switched to Fedora. I DO NOT
WANT rolling release please. Leave rolling to gentoo, arch and other
plumber's distros, keep making great desktop system i can put on work
box and just use it.

Recently nagios got updated from 2.x to 3.x branch in RPMForge EL
repository and yum-cron pulled it in automagically. Result is broken
monitoring tool i don't have time/will to repair. I don't want to my
development tools to break suddenly few days before project deadline
at work while applying bugfix packages to amarok.

There's a reason why Fedora supports development, current and previous
branches. Fedora is designed to WORK while being bleeding edge

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Eric Springer <erikina@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fedora has always lead the progress of FOSS by closely following
> upstream and making non-trivial contributions. I see this is a great
> strength, and like many other people it's my primary reason for using
> it. But it's not without trade-offs, such as giving Fedora a
> perception of being 'beta' software and balancing new software without
> burning the large user base is not easy either.
>
> This hit home today, after being impressed with the work you guys have
> done with plymouth, I did a quick Google search[1] to find out a
> little more. The first result is a "Ubuntu brainstorm" page[2] about
> implementing it in their own distribution and the second comment is "I
> support the idea but I do think that it should only be considered
> after Fedora has done all the dirty work of getting it to work". This
> is no way intended as a criticism of a Ubuntu, but it's a realization
> that distributions like Ubuntu are able to offer a better user
> experience by using stable software on a longer support cycle.
>
> So what I propose is that Fedora goes to a rolling release cycle.
> Implemented properly I believe we can better achieve Fedoras
> objectives[3] of rapidly progressing Free Open Source Software, while
> providing a more user centric focus (and bringing something new to the
> easy-to-use-table). While I would prefer to not get bogged down in the
> technical details at this stage, we would need to provide software in
> varying levels of stability.
>
> Perhaps something like:
> hemorrhaging -> rawhide -> stable -> rocksolid
>
> Users should be able to very easily and freely move through the
> levels, especially on a per-package basis (with PackageKit). It should
> also be easy for users to "freeze" their system/package to only
> receive security (and optionally bug) patches, as many aren't
> interested in the constant upgrade cycle.
>
> New features/software/functionality would be easily tested by the
> masses without needing to upgrade the entire distribution. It would
> give the open source community a massive user-base they could call
> upon to test easily.
>
> The average user would sit at the 'stable' level while perhaps
> testing/using a few of their favorite software from rawhide. Servers
> would typically sit at the rocksolid level, and use stable packages on
> a needs-only basis.
>
>
>
> Thoughts? Flames? Ideas?
>
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.google.com/search?q=Fedora+Plymouth
> [2] http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/11165/
> [3] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives
>
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>



--
http://scwlab.com

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 11-10-2008, 05:17 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default Proposal: Rolling Release

Martin Langhoff wrote:

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com> wrote:

The real missing piece is 'undo' when you find out that a change in the new
version breaks something that you need. Does anyone know if that actually
works on systems using conary (i.e. can you back up a major revision)?


Using hardlink forests, Scott's olpc-update does some of that. It's
not integrated to rpm/yum but it could easily be turned into a "cheap
snapshot" without having to wait for ZFS/BTRFS. I am not madly in love
with it, but it does its job.


I'm not sure returning to a filesystem snapshot is exactly the right
thing either unless the update fails to run at all. You may have run
long enough to make changes you want to keep before discovering the
showstopper bug.



You'll find - however- that applications and desktop environments
often upgrade their storage formats, so your downgrade path may be
well oiled in the rpm/yum sense, and yet completely unusable for end
users.


Yes, but that is a problem on its own. It is just as horrible that you
can't mount a shared /home for an assortment for an assortment of
distro's/versions to access simultaneously or serially. You'd think
there would be some standards for that sort of thing - or people would
just avoid applications that can't settle on a format that can be
backwards/forwards compatible.


--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesll@gmail.com

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 11-10-2008, 05:19 PM
Olivier Galibert
 
Default Proposal: Rolling Release

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 03:50:38PM +0100, David Nielsen wrote:
> I, for one, really like that I can install my F9 desktop and be sure that
> most of my applications are up to date

Only for a year from the release of f9 though...

OG.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 11-10-2008, 05:23 PM
Patrice Dumas
 
Default Proposal: Rolling Release

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 08:08:51PM +0200, Pavel Shevchuk wrote:
>
> Recently nagios got updated from 2.x to 3.x branch in RPMForge EL
> repository and yum-cron pulled it in automagically. Result is broken
> monitoring tool i don't have time/will to repair. I don't want to my

This can also happen in fedora, it is common to have package changes
applied to 'stable' branches. Also I don't think this is what the person
you responded to had in mind, indeed a 'rocksolid' (or even a 'stable'?)
release would certainly be a release where updating packages to the
latest version is avoided.

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 11-10-2008, 05:24 PM
Olivier Galibert
 
Default Proposal: Rolling Release

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 09:58:52AM -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> It just needs to be turned into a mandatory update tool with PackageKit.
> Joe Enduser needs to be able to click "Update Me!" and go from Fedora
> 9 to Fedora 10 with a single click.

Can I update from up-to-date fedora N to fedora N+1 through a command
line ssh connection now? Or is that still unsupported?

And if yes, how? Is it just changing the repository to N+1 and yum
update?

No clicking or booting on something else involved, please. Something
one can do reasonably automatically on 300+ systems without having to
go in front of them.

OG.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 11-10-2008, 05:30 PM
"Jon Ciesla"
 
Default Proposal: Rolling Release

> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 09:58:52AM -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>> It just needs to be turned into a mandatory update tool with PackageKit.
>> Joe Enduser needs to be able to click "Update Me!" and go from Fedora
>> 9 to Fedora 10 with a single click.
>
> Can I update from up-to-date fedora N to fedora N+1 through a command
> line ssh connection now? Or is that still unsupported?
>
> And if yes, how? Is it just changing the repository to N+1 and yum
> update?

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/LiveUpgrade

> No clicking or booting on something else involved, please. Something
> one can do reasonably automatically on 300+ systems without having to
> go in front of them.
>
> OG.
>
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>


--
in your fear, speak only peace
in your fear, speak only love

-d. bowie

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 11-10-2008, 05:49 PM
Olivier Galibert
 
Default Proposal: Rolling Release

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:30:45PM -0600, Jon Ciesla wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 09:58:52AM -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> >> It just needs to be turned into a mandatory update tool with PackageKit.
> >> Joe Enduser needs to be able to click "Update Me!" and go from Fedora
> >> 9 to Fedora 10 with a single click.
> >
> > Can I update from up-to-date fedora N to fedora N+1 through a command
> > line ssh connection now? Or is that still unsupported?
> >
> > And if yes, how? Is it just changing the repository to N+1 and yum
> > update?
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/LiveUpgrade

Niiiiiiiiiice. Now that's one thing that is going to make my sysadmin
life nicer.

OG.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 11-10-2008, 05:52 PM
Callum Lerwick
 
Default Proposal: Rolling Release

On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 23:35 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > The real missing piece is 'undo' when you find out that a change in the
> > new version breaks something that you need. Does anyone know if that
> > actually works on systems using conary (i.e. can you back up a major
> > revision)?
>
> Not feasible for RPM due to pre/post scripts. The rudimentary roll back
> support in RPM has actually been removed in 4.6. It probably needs the
> underlying filesytem to support snapshots. Something like btrfs needs to
> be in place first.

We need rollback if we ever want to be serious about end-user testing.

With non-critical (as in, not needed for yum to run...) packages an "rpm
-e somepackage --nodeps" "yum install somepackage" offers something of a
rollback...

Filesystem rollback may work for full-distribution upgrade rollback, but
won't work so well for per-package rollback. A user should be able to
cherry pick updates to try from "updates-testing", and easily roll back
individual packages, or their entire system to "updates" or even the
"fedora" repo should something go wrong.

Debian can do this. The only reason we can not is because we refuse to.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 11-10-2008, 06:02 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default Proposal: Rolling Release

On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 12:52 -0600, Callum Lerwick wrote:
> Debian can do this. The only reason we can not is because we refuse
> to.

And so far we refuse to be cause we allow free-form scriptlets in rpms.

It would be interesting to see how one would upgrade say mysql major
version and then roll it back all via packaging. Something that
requires changing the on disk format of your databases and such.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom˛ is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 11-10-2008, 06:08 PM
"Jon Ciesla"
 
Default Proposal: Rolling Release

> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:30:45PM -0600, Jon Ciesla wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 09:58:52AM -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>> >> It just needs to be turned into a mandatory update tool with
>> PackageKit.
>> >> Joe Enduser needs to be able to click "Update Me!" and go from
>> Fedora
>> >> 9 to Fedora 10 with a single click.
>> >
>> > Can I update from up-to-date fedora N to fedora N+1 through a command
>> > line ssh connection now? Or is that still unsupported?
>> >
>> > And if yes, how? Is it just changing the repository to N+1 and yum
>> > update?
>>
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/LiveUpgrade
>
> Niiiiiiiiiice. Now that's one thing that is going to make my sysadmin
> life nicer.

I've been doing this since F-1, and I have one box that's been done that
way since F-3. Basically, read the release notes, prepare what you have
to, generally db dumps, etc, and do the above. With very few exceptions,
it works very well. Still not "officially supported", though I like
preupgrade, too, even though it's not the same goal at all.

> OG.
>


--
in your fear, speak only peace
in your fear, speak only love

-d. bowie

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:07 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org