Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-features (503 mails)

< Previous Next >
[openFate 305634] Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade
  • From: fate_noreply@xxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:22:48 +0100 (CET)
  • Message-id: <feature-305634-24@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Feature changed by: Thorsten Kukuk (kukuk)
Feature #305634, revision 24
Title: Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade

openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation
Requester: Mandatory

Requested by: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi)
Interested: Andre Duffeck (aduffeck)
Interested: Bruno Friedmann (bruno_friedmann)
Interested: Francis Giannaros (apokryphos)
Interested: Guy Lunardi (glunardi)
Interested: Joe Brockmeier (jbrockmeier)
Interested: JP Rosevear (jproseve)
Interested: Klaus Kämpf (kwk)
Interested: Mario Carrion (mariocarrion)
Interested: Markus K (kamikazow)
Interested: Matthias Eckermann (mge1512)
Interested: Maxi Schimmel (maxxs)
Interested: Robert Davies (robopensuse)
Interested: Stefan Behlert (sbehlert)
Interested: Stephan Binner (beineri)
Interested: Stephan Kulow (coolo)
Interested: Thorsten Kukuk (kukuk)
Partner organization:

With the 11.2 cycle, we want to offer users the ability to perform a
live system upgrade in the manner of Debian's dist-upgrade.
For the purpose of this cycle, we want to support dist-upgrade from the
previous version (11.1) only, as this is a sufficiently complicated
problem as is.
From the user's view, the difference is between being able to update
the system incrementally within the given version or service pack
running, to being ble to migrate with a system command ("zypper dup" or
similar) to a higher version altogether.
In the Debian experience, the set of base distributions is not
necessarily limited, but it has been Ubuntu's practice to define what
starting points other than "release n-1" are allowed (for instance, all
LTS versions are purported to be able to "apt dist-upgrade" to the top
of the line, although I have heard of problems trying to jump two years
- 6.06->8.10 - in a fell swoop in this manner :-).
In the openSUSE scope, we should aim to be able to "dup" between
incremental versions, starting from 11.1 to 11.2, and later 11.x to

Business case (Partner benefit): With the introduction of the Zypper stack to SLE, we
finally reached the state of a featureful (which YOU was not) and fast,
reliable (which ZLM was not) update stack in the platform.
For enterprise use, some tweaks are still desirable (changelogs,
rollback, ...) which we are looking at, as well as improvements on the
Enterprise management front, which we are working on with our SRM
The only really significant competitive feature we are missing at this
point is the Debian/Ubuntu dist-upgrade functionality, which has a
powerful psychological impact at the Enterprise level and a much more
tangible impact at the small user / single user level: many with no IT
department do use Ubuntu these days on the basis that "chasing" Fedora
and openSUSE along the six-month upgrade cycle is too much for them,
and feel they can save time on Ubuntu with the combination of dist-
upgrade and the longer LTS cycle.
The rationale for pursuing this is to revoke the special status of
coolness this functionality gives Ubuntu, and to terminate the negative
influence that may have on our SLE sales (from the expert's personal
opinion, the preference then easily spills into purchasing).

#1: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) (2009-01-07 20:42:15)
This is the #1 feature in the systems management scope for 11.2 - I
have no doubt it will be fun :-)

#4: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2009-01-09 11:32:53)
Passing to mls for technical evaluation (solver + autobuild)

#5: Michael Schröder (mlschroe) (2009-01-09 12:48:10)
Any hint on what features are currently missing?

#6: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2009-01-09 13:30:57) (reply to #5)
From the top of my head:
How to handle
* Library ABI changes (e.g. major gcc/g++ upgrades) ?
* Core package changes (e.g. devs.rpm to udev) ?
* Kernel changes (if application/deamons need a specific kernel abi,
dbus comes into mind) ?
* Failure handling (network breakdown, package update errors, ...) ?
* Booting of the new kernel ?

#7: Michael Schröder (mlschroe) (2009-01-09 14:45:09) (reply to #6)
And debian does this in some way?

#8: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-01-17 12:43:42) (reply to #7)
The distupgrade feature differs from changing source list and doing
upgrade, so some utility process could be started. They may require
some documented procedure to be followed, for "tough" changes. But ABI
change, how long since ELF/glibc was introduced? C++ ABI ought not be
relevant for upgrade process, they are "just" applications and libaries
to be updated. Failure handling - you are told to back up your system
first, it is "best effort" not guaranteed. The less you have installed
the more likely it is to succeed. Debian offer choice of kernels, this
may "punt" the problem to a user controlled install and select from
GRUB menu. Debian have apt-cache possibility, to create central pool of
packages, to decrease liklihood of network troubles, as well as huge
number CD and DVD iso's.

+ #9: Thorsten Kukuk (kukuk) (2009-01-17 15:24:35) (reply to #8)
+ The glibc internal ABI changes frequently. Means, running applications
+ will continue to use the old glibc with the old ABI, but installed are
+ already the new plugins => running applications can crash.

openSUSE Feature:

< Previous Next >
This Thread