[CentOS] Upgrading FC2 to CentOS 5.* - anyone second this? - general report

Max Pyziur

pyz at brama.com
Sun Jun 3 18:53:15 UTC 2012

On Sun, 3 Jun 2012, Les Mikesell wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Max Pyziur <pyz at brama.com> wrote:
>> I recognize that most of the comments were from sysadmins, more involved
>> in managing server farms, and steeped in that knowledge/experience base.
> And in upgrades, and thus have experience with the difference in
> effort and results....

My point was that it is a different focus, knowledge, and experience base. 
If server farm system administration is what you know, then you will place
all issues in that framework. If all you know how to use is a jackhammer, 
then you'll approach every problem in the same way.

My personal goal was to preserve the topology of the disk layout, as well 
as the configurations.

> And you still have yet to explain what you think the result of the
> extra hours of downloading and work has gained compared to a clean

What extra hours? The downloading was done overnight, the diskburning was 
relatively quick.

> install and copying your data back.   As far as I can see, it is a
> bunch of orphaned files, a wildly fragmented disk layout, and probably

This is now an example of a casebook fallacy - a strawman argument. W/o 
investigating anything, you've projected a set of unsubstantiated 
qualifications on a situation and are now arguing against them.

> a less efficient filesystem.   This is especially true since you
> mentioned having several disks, one probably large enough to hold a
> complete backup of the old system disk so you could easily pick out
> what you want back in the new install.

The 2TB disk is where backups for several resident machines resides 
(notebooks, desktops); it's about 84% full. Admittedly, there's space for 
configurations, but that was not my first interest (I think that I've 
stated that at least twice).

pyz at brama.com

More information about the CentOS mailing list