On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 08:56, Michael J. Pawlowsky wrote:
I have been running FC2 happily for some time now. The question is whether or not to upgrade to FC3.
< ... snip ...>
I did upgraded from FC2 to FC3 but did not like the results of an "upgrade". Mostly I did it simply to stay current.
I ended up doing a fresh install and simply copying back the config files, home directories and data files.
For many (myself included), "staying current" is the ONLY reason to upgrade... staying current of course means that you can get help when you need it, and run code that doesn't have a lot of vulnerabilities. The new features are nice, too :)
The drawback (BIG) is that for most OS's 'upgrading' is a major pain in
the butt! This of course being mostly due to the fact that a lot of time
and effort is required to make all the manual changes to config files,
etc.
Indeed. It's the things you forgot you did that cause the problems. Also building your own packages can screw things up, but Fedora is so up to date that it has been a long time since I needed to do it - which is great.
> In my opinion, the ideal would be an OS upgrade every 3-4 years, >and/or > some better (more complete?) tools for automating the upgrade process. > I'm sure this is a pretty difficult thing to do, but I'm into wishful > thinking today :)
I wouldn't have thought it would be too difficult. Looking at the FC2 -> FC3, the only things I have found (so far) that aren't covered by the normal update are LVM and gcc 3.4.
Obviously upgrading gcc isn't something you want to happen when your not looking but that's easily handled.
-- Ian Leonard
Please ignore spelling and punctuation - I did.
