[ale] Red Hat upgrades?

[Michael H. Warfield]

== Big snip ==

On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 18:45 -0400, James Sumners wrote:

> I'm glad someone with a bigger resume than me gets it. All of this "no
> upgrades between major versions means stability" garbage is merely a
> justification for accepting a broken system (in my opinion). Like you,
> I don't enjoy wasting hours of my time rebuilding ONE system and then
> doing the same for the other X number of systems.

> I just wish companies that say they "support Linux" didn't really mean
> they "support Red Hat."

> You mentioned that Fedora has gained the equivalent of `apt-get
> dist-upgrade`. Does it also have the equivalent of `echo "postgresql
> hold" | dpkg --set-selections` [1]? That would certainly help in your
> upgrades when you know a package is going to require extra work.

> [1] -- http://www.debianadmin.com/how-to-prevent-a-package-from-being-updated-in-debian.html

Oh yeah.  Yum has an option to ignore packages like postgresql unless it
creates dependency conflicts and then it complains.  That's pretty
trivial.  But it's really a chicken and egg situation.  If you know to
ignore the thing in advance then you know in advance to dump the
database, upgrade and restore the database (which is very straight
forward).

Regards,
Mike
-- 
Michael H. Warfield (AI4NB) | (770) 985-6132 |  mhw at WittsEnd.com
   /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/          | (678) 463-0932 |  http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
   NIC whois: MHW9          | An optimist believes we live in the best of all
 PGP Key: 0x674627FF        | possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 482 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20110705/0516c435/attachment.bin