On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 06:06:56PM -0500, Tony Nelson wrote: > At 6:18 AM -0600 11/11/05, akonstam@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 03:08:53PM -0800, Ed Swierk wrote: > >> I just completed an upgrade from FC3 to FC4 using the FC4 CDs. > >> > >> What I'm left with can hardly be called an FC4 installation, since it > >> left nearly 80 FC3 packages untouched, including kernel and glibc. > >> > >> My guess is that anaconda decided not to upgrade certain updated FC3 > >> packages whose FC4 counterparts had lower version numbers. > >> > >> Have others run into this problem? I would like to help my colleagues > >> avoid the same mess when they upgrade. > >> > >> --Ed > >> > >Would you expect an upograding program to upgrade to packages with a > >lowere version number? > > When it is doing an OS install, yes. > > >You can't expect any upgrading system to know > >that to go to a hoigher version of the distribution lower versions of > >packages need to be installed. > > Sure, when it is installing an OS. Anaconda's /job/ is to install an OS. > It should note all the packages needing downgrading and ask the user what > to do. It should work to install an OS upgrade, or a downgrade, with equal > facility, and not leave an inconsistent installation. Anaconda has a list > of all the rpms it expects to install, and that's what should end up > installed. Well of course it is matter of philosophy. I could see it going either way. This is I reiterate not an install but an upgrade. I would be amazed if one ran yum upgrade and have a lower version installed because that was the one associated with FC4. I can see anaconda designed as you want it to be but to me that would violate the basic meaning of upgrade. -- ======================================================================= With Congress, every time they make a joke it's a law; and every time they make a law it's a joke. -- Will Rogers ------------------------------------------- Aaron Konstam Computer Science Trinity University telephone: (210)-999-7484
