On Wed, 14 May 2008, Stephen Hahn wrote: > It looks like you're comparing three paths: > > 2008.05 -> intermediate package versions -> 2008.11 > 2008.05 -> 2008.11 > (null) -> 2008.11 > > The difference, for the common subset of packages, would be that the > intermediate package updates and the .05 -> .11 update could leave > different non-packaged files on the system (dependent on application > behaviour) and that specific package operations might require > configuration updates to stay up to date on the latest default > settings (also application dependent). The fresh install of .11 would > have none of these.
Yes, that's a pretty accurate summarization of my question. For the purposes of "18 months of support" which of those paths would result in a valid 2008.11 supported installation? Could you take path number one, verifying updated configuration as necessary? Or would an actual upgrade (path number two?) be required to reach a new supported installation? Or a full reinstall? If package update proceeded directly from the versions shipped with 2008.05 to the versions shipped with 2008.11 (with no intermediate updates performed), are path number two and path number one equivalent? What does the packaging system do with a package that deploys a configuration file? Simply not install it if a version already exists? Overwrite the existing version if and only if it is identical to the version originally installed (ie, never edited)? Thanks... -- Paul B. Henson | (909) 979-6361 | http://www.csupomona.edu/~henson/ Operating Systems and Network Analyst | [EMAIL PROTECTED] California State Polytechnic University | Pomona CA 91768 _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
