[1788] in SIPB_Linux_Development
Re: RedHat Athena 4.2 - Upgrade Issues
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Aaron M. Ucko)
Fri Aug 29 15:07:46 1997
To: Edwin Foo <efoo@MIT.EDU>
Cc: linux-dev@MIT.EDU
From: amu@MIT.EDU (Aaron M. Ucko)
Date: 29 Aug 1997 15:07:09 -0400
In-Reply-To: Edwin Foo's message of "Fri, 29 Aug 1997 14:55:34 -0400"
Edwin Foo <efoo@MIT.EDU> writes:
> I just received the news about the RedHat-Athena 4.2 beta -- kudos to all
> those who worked on it all summer.
>
> I was wondering though if someone could document the differences between a
> RedHat 4.2+Athena (pre RedHat-Athena) setup and the new setup available on
> small-gods.. I'd like to know what I stand to lose/gain by moving to the
> "official" release rather than sticking with setups which were put together
> by installing vanilla RedHat 4.2 and manually installing the Athena RPMs.
Some of the Athena software is new and/or improved. (For instance, we
upgraded emacs to 19.34 and AFS to 3.3a, and now include Transcript
and Motif development file; there were quite a few smaller changes as
well.) Users can now install packages containing symlinks from files
in /usr/athena to our system pack.
> Are there any plans to issue an upgrade path for people with the previous
> version of RedHat-Athena, or the interim hack that some people are using
> (like me) with vanilla RedHat 4.2+Athena RPMs? I would be willing to help
> put together such a routine if someone who worked on the beta release can
> help document the differences between the two setups and identify what
> needs to be upgraded and how.
The Red Hat packages should upgrade smoothly. The Athena packages are
more difficult; we now use a more reasonable package organization and
naming scheme, which has the unfortunate side-effect that users have
to upgrade by deinstalling old Athena packages and installing new ones
rather than using rpm -U.
--
Aaron M. Ucko <amu@mit.edu> (finger amu@monk.mit.edu) [Stark raving sane]
