gf durin wrote:
Why use Fedora? I like it. 3 year support cycle sounds attractive -
but to be honest, Linux software is moving at a rate the updating
every year or so is highly recommended - at least for the desktop.
The new stuff introduced is just worth it, and upgrading is generally
pretty painless (especially if /home is a separate partition).
Hmmm, I take this occasion to tell you my experience. Not sure about
painless...
Listen, I decided to move from FC3 to FC4 with my PC at home. Nothing
important there (not yet) so I simply put the 4 CDs, and chose the
'upgrade' choice.
Everything seemed to be ok. It copied what it needed, made a reboot,
but when the system started I had no signs of the FC4 kernel. There
were some signatures of FC4, but I realized it simply updgraded some
rpms, but not the system. A mixture of FC3 and FC4, but... with a lot
of errors, and so on. I had to time to fight with it, so I turned to
the CDs and meake a fresh Fc4 installation
I feel quite disappointed by this experience. Maybe I did not
understand the meaning of 'update', but this is not what I expected.
I think that the way to make linux (more) popular is to be robust
against upgrade. I received a message yesterday of the type 'upgrade:
no thanks!'
I am sure I still need to discovery something about this stuff, in any
case I appreciate your suggestions of this matter
Regards
Gianfranco
Sorry to hear that.
As a rule of thumb I always avoid upgrading operating systems. Having
had to administer several boxen upgraded from one version of Windows
server to another, I know first-hand that the possibilities for disaster
are enormous. Fortunatly, in the Linux world, upgrading (for me
anyway), has always been a matter of nfs mounting a remote /home
directory. Obviously, the same could be achieved with a local drive
(and doing thorough backups!).
You may want to give it a try sometime.
Later,
David-Paul Niner
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
