<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="lyceum/1.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Interview: Fedora developers Seth Vidal and Will Woods</title>
	<link>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/</link>
	<description>Red Hat Magazine</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 23:56:28 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://lyceum.ibiblio.org/?v=1.0.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Panayiotis Tzanavaris</title>
		<link>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-117952</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Aug 2008 02:38:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-117952</guid>
					<description>Your computer will probably be dead or obsolete in 5 years maximum. You can put the latest OS on the new machine you get then. Life is short. Stick to what you've got since it works. Go get some fresh air and see the world. Think about this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your computer will probably be dead or obsolete in 5 years maximum. You can put the latest OS on the new machine you get then. Life is short. Stick to what you&#8217;ve got since it works. Go get some fresh air and see the world. Think about this.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Jon</title>
		<link>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-88813</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 14:58:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-88813</guid>
					<description>What about my server in a datacenter across the country?  This is the reason I have to use yum to upgrade, I don't want to pay some tech support guy $100 to upgrade for me.  I am surprised that with the adoption of Fedora as a server OS that  they don't even consider this issue.  I'm glad yum updates work because I'd still be on FC4 on most of my machines, but it would be so fabulous to have a yum upgrade supported.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What about my server in a datacenter across the country?  This is the reason I have to use yum to upgrade, I don&#8217;t want to pay some tech support guy $100 to upgrade for me.  I am surprised that with the adoption of Fedora as a server OS that  they don&#8217;t even consider this issue.  I&#8217;m glad yum updates work because I&#8217;d still be on FC4 on most of my machines, but it would be so fabulous to have a yum upgrade supported.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Why not upgrade to Fedora 9? &#171; The GNOME Commentary</title>
		<link>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-84914</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 15:16:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-84914</guid>
					<description>[...] May 13, 2008 at 5:30 pm (Fedora, Linux) Tags: fedora, preupgrade, release, upgrade   You might be sitting there on your Fedora 7 or 8 setup, reading the Fedora 9 release notes drooling all over yourself wishing it was on your machine. Well why not upgrade to it without the ISO download using PreUpgrade? [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] May 13, 2008 at 5:30 pm (Fedora, Linux) Tags: fedora, preupgrade, release, upgrade   You might be sitting there on your Fedora 7 or 8 setup, reading the Fedora 9 release notes drooling all over yourself wishing it was on your machine. Well why not upgrade to it without the ISO download using PreUpgrade? [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Alan Lake</title>
		<link>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-83441</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 May 2008 08:57:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-83441</guid>
					<description>There is a version of preupgrade available for F7.  See
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=6045

I had not upgraded from F7 to F8 because I was waiting for this, which I had heard about.  I downloaded the F7 version and found that the only upgrade option it gave me was an upgrade to F8.  I figured that this would be OK, for F8 would give me the ability to upgrade to F9.  It downloaded files OK, but hung up during the phase where it was looking for dependencies.  That's the bad news.  The good news is that I was able to reboot into F7 with no hitches.  I'm going to try to do this again but with more space in the /boot partition...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a version of preupgrade available for F7.  See<br />
<a href="http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=6045" rel="nofollow">http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=6045</a></p>
<p>I had not upgraded from F7 to F8 because I was waiting for this, which I had heard about.  I downloaded the F7 version and found that the only upgrade option it gave me was an upgrade to F8.  I figured that this would be OK, for F8 would give me the ability to upgrade to F9.  It downloaded files OK, but hung up during the phase where it was looking for dependencies.  That&#8217;s the bad news.  The good news is that I was able to reboot into F7 with no hitches.  I&#8217;m going to try to do this again but with more space in the /boot partition&#8230;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Marland V. Pittman</title>
		<link>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-72190</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 11:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-72190</guid>
					<description>Gave it another go on a fresh install of F8... checked the testing repo, ran preupgrade from the command line, and I'm off to work... (the place where I work, not working on my computer).

Here's to moving in the right direction!

MVP</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gave it another go on a fresh install of F8&#8230; checked the testing repo, ran preupgrade from the command line, and I&#8217;m off to work&#8230; (the place where I work, not working on my computer).</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s to moving in the right direction!</p>
<p>MVP
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: eMBee</title>
		<link>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-71311</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 07:12:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-71311</guid>
					<description>from that 11-page-long list of potential problems upgrading debian not a single one has anything to do with upgrading through apt while the system is running. the all point out problems that may arise from changes in the configuration or applications after the upgrade.

greetings, eMBee</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>from that 11-page-long list of potential problems upgrading debian not a single one has anything to do with upgrading through apt while the system is running. the all point out problems that may arise from changes in the configuration or applications after the upgrade.</p>
<p>greetings, eMBee
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: eMBee</title>
		<link>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-71309</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 07:08:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-71309</guid>
					<description>from that 11-page-long list of potential problems upgrading debian not a single one has anything to do with upgrading through apt while the system is running. the all point out problems that may arise from changes in the configuration or applications after the upgrade.

greetings, eMBee
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>from that 11-page-long list of potential problems upgrading debian not a single one has anything to do with upgrading through apt while the system is running. the all point out problems that may arise from changes in the configuration or applications after the upgrade.</p>
<p>greetings, eMBee
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: mesrik</title>
		<link>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-71287</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 04:30:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-71287</guid>
					<description>Hi Rahul,

&#62;Not with LVM. It won’t be efficient enough to do a lot of snapshots like you want. Other solutions are either not accessible (different licenses, proprietary, patent issues etc) or alpha level (btrfs) currently.

Thanks for your input, very valid points, really but let me hilight that I pointed just the direction we should be working on (IMHO) and thats the snapshots with copy on write capability. All other solutions seem to be overly complicated long term and don't even provide very much needed easy cutback possibility.

I do know well current licensing problems, patent issues and the technical limitations of LVM etc., but without vision 'there must be better way managing filesystem' Jeff Bonwick et al. would not have not invented ZFS, right?

I'm already quite old unix/linux/bsd *art and just like to remind you that we've seen quite astonshing development since what the filesystem state were with AT&#38;T System 7. I don't think we would be with all these features if we had given up and not even tried. 

Butter fs (btrfs) and NILFS both seem good start. ZFS got head start, but I bet that competition can make even ZFS better and if Sun doesn't see the light (pun intended) by double licensing or whatever needed to get ZFS widely abopted with Linux there something else will replace it with competent features.

I was just encouraging and pointing out which direction we will have to in long term go. 

Not that we have all the needed tech available quite yet, unfortunately, but it will happen sooner or later. Also it will likely happen sooner if we all understand the benefits and are able to push together, right. 

Knowing that giants like Oracle and NEC have taken on the challenge this is much more likely to happen compared to the early times when Linux was young and simple, so simple that I could even get it and patch features or fix broken issues to kernel fairly easily :) 

Now it's so complicated that I don't have time to delve in, but certainly will still be able to have a clear vision which direction the solution will be found.

Cheers, and keep up good work with Fedora

:-) riku
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Rahul,</p>
<p>&gt;Not with LVM. It won’t be efficient enough to do a lot of snapshots like you want. Other solutions are either not accessible (different licenses, proprietary, patent issues etc) or alpha level (btrfs) currently.</p>
<p>Thanks for your input, very valid points, really but let me hilight that I pointed just the direction we should be working on (IMHO) and thats the snapshots with copy on write capability. All other solutions seem to be overly complicated long term and don&#8217;t even provide very much needed easy cutback possibility.</p>
<p>I do know well current licensing problems, patent issues and the technical limitations of LVM etc., but without vision &#8216;there must be better way managing filesystem&#8217; Jeff Bonwick et al. would not have not invented ZFS, right?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m already quite old unix/linux/bsd *art and just like to remind you that we&#8217;ve seen quite astonshing development since what the filesystem state were with AT&amp;T System 7. I don&#8217;t think we would be with all these features if we had given up and not even tried. </p>
<p>Butter fs (btrfs) and NILFS both seem good start. ZFS got head start, but I bet that competition can make even ZFS better and if Sun doesn&#8217;t see the light (pun intended) by double licensing or whatever needed to get ZFS widely abopted with Linux there something else will replace it with competent features.</p>
<p>I was just encouraging and pointing out which direction we will have to in long term go. </p>
<p>Not that we have all the needed tech available quite yet, unfortunately, but it will happen sooner or later. Also it will likely happen sooner if we all understand the benefits and are able to push together, right. </p>
<p>Knowing that giants like Oracle and NEC have taken on the challenge this is much more likely to happen compared to the early times when Linux was young and simple, so simple that I could even get it and patch features or fix broken issues to kernel fairly easily :) </p>
<p>Now it&#8217;s so complicated that I don&#8217;t have time to delve in, but certainly will still be able to have a clear vision which direction the solution will be found.</p>
<p>Cheers, and keep up good work with Fedora</p>
<p>:-) riku
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Xi</title>
		<link>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-71215</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:58:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-71215</guid>
					<description>There is also NILFS for Linux which can do lots of snapshots efficiently. Itś developed by Nippon Telephone &#38; Telegraph Co. and is in a much more mature state than btrfs. But architecturally they are very different and really I prefer the way btrfs does things..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is also NILFS for Linux which can do lots of snapshots efficiently. Itś developed by Nippon Telephone &amp; Telegraph Co. and is in a much more mature state than btrfs. But architecturally they are very different and really I prefer the way btrfs does things..
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Lloyd</title>
		<link>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-69649</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:19:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/04/15/interview-fedora-developers-seth-vidal-and-will-woods/#comment-69649</guid>
					<description>Is there any chance you will offer this in Fedora7 for the upgrade to 9.  I only see it in Fedora8 testing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is there any chance you will offer this in Fedora7 for the upgrade to 9.  I only see it in Fedora8 testing.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
