Dudydoo Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 How easy would it be to upgrade a RH9 server to Fedora Core 1 without formatting etc. and what is involved? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holgr Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 you could run into problems if you are using non-rh rpms (e.g. from freshrpms, etc.)... if you only use the ones rh shipped, there should be no big problems, but it depends on which services you run... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markwolfe Veteran Posted December 20, 2003 Veteran Share Posted December 20, 2003 I made the switch, using the FC1 "update" option. My data was well preserved, but there were a few "issues" that may annoy (as the require work to get the system back to the way it was running). It dumped my nVidia GL-capable driver, and used the default driver with no 3D (OpenGL) accelleration. It switched from my KDE default to Gnome. The new browser it installed (I had already updated Mozilla manually) lost my plug-ins (java, etc.) I think that's about it. No *real* problems, just annoyances. BTW, I had installed non-RH RPMs, and the programs ran just fine under FC1 without any need to modify or reload. Maybe it is because I was lucky and no dependencies were changed... I recommend upgrading. Just (as usual) make sure you have a good backup! :shifty: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudydoo Posted December 20, 2003 Author Share Posted December 20, 2003 Thanks for the positive reply's :) The server only really runs as a Samba box. Nothing special. I just thought i'd like to upgrade it as errata, support etc. will eventually go over to Fedora from RedHat, and I like both distro's, so I want to keep upgrading as each fedora release comes out. I also thought about upgrading to Samba 3.0. Anyone know what it's like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markwolfe Veteran Posted December 20, 2003 Veteran Share Posted December 20, 2003 I have heard great things about samba 3. It is supposed to be *very* capable. I have heard of tests where it out-performed Windows own SMB sharing! (you will always find test results with opposite claims). Unless you are looking for features in 3 that you don't have (and you really want), I would hold off on upgrading for just a bit (let the bleeding edge stuff settle down a bit).... Depends on your own preferences. If it is a low-risk application of samba, you might *want* to use 3. For a corporate environment where your current samba is doing the job well, I would not upgrade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthater Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 Be sure to let us know if/when you do this upgrade. I have a redhat 9 server I would like to upgrade as well, but I have been too chicken. I would like to hear your experiences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts