[3545] in SIPB_Linux_Development
Re: update failure from fresh install
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Greg Hudson)
Mon Sep 3 14:12:44 2001
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:12:39 -0400
Message-Id: <200109031812.OAA13414@egyptian-gods.MIT.EDU>
From: Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU>
To: Derek Atkins <warlord@mit.edu>
CC: Angie Kelic <sly@mit.edu>, linux-dev@mit.edu
In-reply-to: <sjmae0cs2ys.fsf@rcn.ihtfp.org>
>> It says we're installing 8.4.0 just because, well, because I think
>> we didn't want to deal with the versions changing out from under
>> us, but I think the rpms are 8.4.25.
> I'm fairly certain that _that_ is not sufficient. Everything I have
> always been told was that you have to update to the latest 8.4.x
> before updating to 9.0.x, and I've never heard that that has
> changed.
update_ws only uses the version number to decide whether there is an
update to be taken; once the update has begun, the old version number
isn't important. I wish the SIPB installer didn't lie about the
version it installs (because it breaks mkserv and damages our ability
to determine the history of a machine), but that's not the problem
here.
There is no general requirement that you take the most recent patch
release before taking a full release, though it is often safer because
we don't test all combinations. There is a specific requirement that
you have at least 8.4.25 before updating to 9.0.x because of the RPM
4.x format change.
