Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0. The upgrade date is tentatively scheduled for 2 December 2018, pending final testing and feedback.
Bug 172917 - FC4 anaconda failed to upgrade many FC3 packages
FC4 anaconda failed to upgrade many FC3 packages
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: anaconda (Show other bugs)
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Anaconda Maintenance Team
Mike McLean
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2005-11-11 04:46 EST by Ed Swierk
Modified: 2007-11-30 17:11 EST (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2005-11-11 23:24:32 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)
/root/upgrade.log (9.85 MB, text/plain)
2005-11-11 04:46 EST, Ed Swierk
no flags Details

  None (edit)
Description Ed Swierk 2005-11-11 04:46:44 EST
I used the FC4 CD to try to upgrade my laptop which had been running FC3. 
Although the process seemed to finish normally, when I rebooted, I noticed that
many dozens of packages remained untouched by the upgrade, including the kernel
and glibc packages.

I had to upgrade the kernel and glibc packages with rpm, then use yum to grab
the remaining upgrades.

(Since I had been keeping my FC3 system relatively current with updated
packages, the installed FC3 glibc package actually had a higher version number
than the FC4 package.  Perhaps this explains anaconda's confusion?)

See the attached upgrade.log.
Comment 1 Ed Swierk 2005-11-11 04:46:47 EST
Created attachment 120927 [details]
Comment 2 Jeremy Katz 2005-11-11 23:24:32 EST
Yep, anaconda can't upgrade things to a lower version number... that's a bug in
the specific packages as they should be making sure that they keep their version
lower than the FC4 released version
Comment 3 Ed Swierk 2005-11-12 03:00:08 EST
I'm not sure I understand how this could be a bug in the specific packages. 
What version number should an updated FC3 glibc use if it is based on 2.3.6?  It
seems sort of odd to call it 2.3.5 just to keep FC4 happy.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.