From: Alexei_Roudnev (Alexei_Roudnev_at_exigengroup.com)
Date: Sat Dec 22 2007 - 03:06:39 CET
Message-ID: <097901c8443f$4a021ce0$7031a8c0@exigengroup.com> From: "Alexei_Roudnev" <Alexei_Roudnev@exigengroup.com> Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:06:39 -0800 Subject: Re: [suse-sles-e] Upgrade to SLES9 SP4 results in non-bootable systems when using SATA
As I said many times - if Novell can't make a proper testing (and theny
never could do it), then the good solution is to add one more stage into the
SP and Release roadmap:
Instead of current
(1) Closed beta
(2) Release
(Stage 3 is not planned one, but we have it in ALL cases, no any single
exception):
(3) Fixing suddenly found problems and claiming that _it's last time, next
release will be much better_
do something like
(1) Closed Beta
(2) Early Deployment version OR Open Beta.
(Fixing problems without a rush, because customers recongize that _EARLY
DEPLOYMENT_ != _For critical production use_ except _If they need specific
features from it_.
(3) Release - when it can be used for update even if no impirtant features
exists for the customer.
It allows to be on schedule (they could still announce SLES9 SP4 release)
but prevent a headache for the data centers and production-grade users
(because what we have _today_ is _early deployment SP4_, and they should
wait 1 - 2 month until it all stabilize, and then release _Release_
version).
Cisco uses Early Deployment versions; RedHat uses Openbetas; Oracle... hmm,
everyone knows that Oracle11 is early deploymet, don't use it for critical
tasks, use Oracle 10.2.0.3_, Solaris - excellemt testing and excellent
backward compatibility makes them an exception from the rule, and they have
an Open Betas anyway. I don't see, why Novell believe that they can do
anothyng better (without a huge improvement in QA, which is almost
impossible except if they have a strong QA team in US and/or in Germany, not
somewhere else...).
It's not a problem for me personally - I always make my own QA and so I
never (almost) am catched up by the broken upgrade (because I never trust to
the big companies like Novell and because I can [redict an areas of the
problems), but such mistakes can eat out any confidence into the company
(and product) reliability and distruct really important customers.
PS. Good news - no kernel#307 problem if you upgrade you server and
resyncronize YOU from the scratch. So, it was caused by interaction between
old YOU server and new YOU depository content.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Scheck" <scheck@etes.de>
To: <suse-sles-e@suse.com>
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2007 3:42 PM
Subject: Re: [suse-sles-e] Upgrade to SLES9 SP4 results in non-bootable
systems when using SATA
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007, Rasmus Plewe wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 11:55:51AM -0800, Alexei_Roudnev wrote:
>> > It is a bad thing, because it is VERY
>> > EASY to maintain previous kernel in Linux(es).
>>
>> Unfortunately that is not so in every case.
>
> Hum? Then you IMHO should fix something at your distribution - sorry. If
> such a thing would happen on another Enterprise distribution (okay, they
> never delivered a broken kernel yet as Novell did today), I easily can
> even
> advise a non-technical customer to select the older Linux kernel from the
> boot menu and wait for a working fix. Or did you ever tell a secretary via
> phone how to change a grub entry on the boot prompt to even have a chance
> that the system maybe boots again?
>
>> If we wouldn't do proper testing we wouldn't have had all this mess,
>> because we wouldn't have discovered the issue before the release. ;-)
>
> If there would be IMNSHO really proper testing, I wouldn't have to replace
> /dev/sda5 by /dev/hdc5 and /dev/sda6 by /dev/hdc6 this afternoon. And I
> bet
> there's a day where I've to change this the other way round in order to
> get
> the system booting again...
>
>
> Merry christmas
>
> Robert Scheck
>
> --
> Robert Scheck
> Web: http://www.etes.de E-Mail: scheck@etes.de
> ETES GmbH Libanonstrasse 58 A D-70184 Stuttgart
> Fon: +49 (7 11) 48 90 83 - 12 Fax: +49 (7 11) 48 90 83 - 50
>
> Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart HRB 721182
> Geschäftsführende Gesellschafter: Markus Espenhain und Jan Theofel
> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Stuttgart
> USt.-Id.Nr.: DE814767446
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: suse-sles-e-unsubscribe@suse.com
> For additional commands, e-mail: suse-sles-e-help@suse.com
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: suse-sles-e-unsubscribe@suse.com
For additional commands, e-mail: suse-sles-e-help@suse.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri Dec 21 2007 - 16:07:11 CET