Bob PuffNLE wrote:
> I totally agree. I'd much rather see something like 8.2 simply updated as
> time goes on, as it seems to be the last version that was compatible with a
> bunch of 3rd party apps.

That's is the 3rd-party vendor's problem, they should be certifying
their stuff against the LSB releases.

> Actually, I think something like this would be more important:
>
> Keeping a major milestone version current.
>
> Example: 7.2 was the last 2.2.x kernel-based version. Keep it going. 8.2
> Seems to be the last "compatible" 2.4.x version. Keep it going.

Huh? 9.1 will still be 2.4.x, and dumping 8.0, 8.1 and 8.2 (when their
time comes) would mean Vince wouldn't need to do kernel updates on them,
which is a big issue.

I wouldn't want to keep 7.2 boxes around any longer than necessary, and
I haven't. My oldest box is running 8.0, and I have plans to upgrade it
soon (even before this). I have two boxes running 8.1, a lot running
8.2, and have upgraded quite a few to 9.0.

> It's a major pain when you have to load an entirely new OS every 18 months,
> only so that you can keep up with security updates - much worse than even
> Windows.

Except that Mandrake should be trivial to upgrade to ...

> I sincerely hope Mandrake reconsiders their plan. I'd certainly be willing to
> put my money where my mouth is, to keep the updates a flowin'. I've got
> dozens of 7.1 machines that are now not having any new updates, so I have to
> build everything from sources to do updates. Major pita.

Well, the question is what you use them for. 7.1 doesn't have:
-ext3 or XFS, so is useless for serious samba use. Missing rpm macros
and other issues make it a nightmare to compile for. Even 8.1 has quirks
that 8.0 doesn't have ...
-7.1 doesn't have apache2 packages, so provides no apach1->apache2
migration path as 9.0 and 9.1 will
-7.1 still has bind8, maybe even bind4, which I am sure Vince would hate
maintaining any longer than necessary.

In the end, if Mandrake can make upgrade painless, guaranteeing no need
to reboot if you don't want to run on the new kernel until convenient,
then the point is moot anyway, and one *should* upgrade.

The question is whether rpm and urpmi are robust enough for this.

Buchan

-- 
|--------------Another happy Mandrake Club member--------------|
Buchan Milne                Mechanical Engineer, Network Manager
Cellphone * Work            +27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x121
Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering         http://www.cae.co.za
GPG Key                   http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc
1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]