![]() |
Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 23:43:11 -0500 jbk <[hidden email]> wrote: > I finally read through the article and it is something I > would not want to try because you have to be able to > anticipate all the problems you will have. > I still think that the best way is to have parallel > partitions, one with the current OS and the other ready for > the next update. It has worked for me from Fc3 to F7. I agree. I generally prefer to perform fresh installs on my home desktop system and upgrades on my laptop. I have had several bad experiences upgrading RHEL. In 2 specific cases we were upgrading from RHEL between updates. Both cases were done by IT professionals. One was in Toronto that really messed everything up where the development environment was totally messed up. We then requested that IT do a fresh install. At HP in Marlboro, the engineer was an experience IT person who actually maintained the local RHN mirror. He did everything totally by the book by making sure all existing patches were applied, et. al. The end result was that we had to do a fresh install. Most vendors try to insure that you can upgrade between adjacent releases or updates, but sometimes things don't go as planned. At home I frequently do fresh installs into a spare partition so I can always roll back, but I have also found that some desktops (like KDE) are not backwards compatible. -- -- Jerry Feldman <[hidden email]> Boston Linux and Unix PGP key id: 537C5846 PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846 _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
![]() |
|
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |