On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 1:37 PM, drago01 <drago01(a)gmail.com>
> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Dennis Gilmore <dennis(a)ausil.us> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> Hi All,
>> So I asked in the FESCo meeting how you expect upgrades to work without
>> an install tree? the building on the upgrade initramfs and the tree for
>> upgrades is tied into the creation of an install tree. additionally all
>> the future options that have been looked at for livecd creation plan to
>> use anaconda, as such an install tree really is a requirement.
>> I am trying to understand how you expect things to work if you do not
>> produce an install tree.
> Can't we just create a minimum install tree (and don't ship an iso)
> that has everything that is required for fedup and point it to the
> "everything + updates" repo?
Reviving this thread because 1) It seems like an important question,
and 2) I'm not sure everyone on the list understood the implications
Dennis was trying to convey. I know I didn't.
So with the idea that Workstation is doing a live image delivery for
_installs_, how do we foresee upgrades from e.g. F20 to Workstation
Dennis, can you elaborate on what you mean by "install tree", why you
think there wouldn't be an install tree if we focus on a live image,
the requirements fedup would need to allow upgrades, etc?
The suggestion you got in the only other reply seems to be viable to
me, but I don't think anyone here understands from a rel-eng
perspective what is required to make this feasible.