Re: Where Fedora Went Wrong (nice conclusion)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Todd Zullinger wrote:

but I'd think that (again given a 3 digit IQ) that security related
fixes should be pushed in the last couple of months along with bug
fixes that are serious (as in several people have reported it)
stability problems.  Eye candy that's not well tested is another
horse that shouldn't even be given a show at the payoff window.
Agreed.  The hard part is determining which updates are important and
which aren't.  Any bug which affects my system is an important one to
me.  But it might not be so to you, even less so if the fix for me
happens to have an undesired effect on your system.
This is why people use the 'enterprise' distributions (RHEL, Centos,
etc.) for machines where they don't like surprises. With them, someone
else has already sorted out the bug/security fixes from the "here's
something new to test" type of update.
But, someone has to test those new things, and fedora seem to be the
place. Just run it on machines where a surprise can be nice and you can
tolerate ones that aren't.
Another thought about how things could be improved: make yum capable of
rolling back to undo it's last update. Then unless yum itself breaks or
you can't boot even to the saved previous kernel, you could be
adventurous with installing new code without too much danger of killing
your system completely.
--
  Les Mikesell
   [email protected]


[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux