On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Andrew R Paterson <andy.paterson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > But maybe the problem is that not many people install/reinstall/fedup often > enough to get familiar with it. Nor should they. Therein lies a huge reason for why I think the scope is just too extreme when they either have to become familiar with its idiosyncrasies, or read a bunch of documentation. fedup should get better, although I don't know the time frame. One of the ideas floated is to make major upgrades show up in Gnome-Software just like offline updates do which already leverages systemd. And eventually I'd like to see the default installations be a handful of use cases but under neath it all it's a stateless installation that permits easy resets, and atomic updates. > So I simply make sure I avoid the problem. > The thought of risking "mucking it up" after being bitten just once (maybe in > the distant past) still makes me do an "Upgrade" the way I do by a reinstall > but requiring my own /home and other "partitions". Because these are on > separate disks these filesystems are kept securely offline till the install > (upgrade) is complete - then I manually add them - anyone else wanting to be > really sure they have control of an "upgrade" would be sensible in doing the > same thing! No they should test this and try to break it and if they can break it file a bug so that we can all trust the installer, rather than suggesting ways to avoid making things better and more trustworthy. > I am sure the existing anaconda will allow me to do this - but it irritates me > that some people think it shouldn't - and like I say I don't upgrade often > enough to be confident and sure. I've done dozens of /home reuse. It even includes /home on a Btrfs subvolume, which is on a volume that / is also going to be created which normally mandates a reformat which might suggest /home gets obliterated, but the installer instead creates a new subvolume for / instead of reformatting, and reuses the existing /home. > So I'm afraid I want to preserve my filesystems (and their partitioning) and NO > - I don't have backups! - and you wont persuade me to take any either - I > would spend all day doing backups - and please don't give me another lecture > on the subject - I have set up bacula on a large network blah! You hate your data. You want it gone. You're just unwilling to do it directly yourself, so instead you're being passive aggressive with it. > and done script > systems using dump/restore and found that its a full time job which introduces > new risks that pretty well counter the benefits - Unless you are talking about > enterprise systems! OK add the lack of a really good backup and restore to the list of consequences everyone suffers from, by everyone demanding their obscure layout be supported. These arbitrary layouts, rather than standardization, is impossible to restore correctly without human intervention or very expensive (development knowledge and time and testing) backup restore software. > Neurotic I might be, but that's the way I do an "upgrade" because I don't > trust the installer - yum upgrade - fedup or whatever its next incarnation > might be! Well as yet not neurotic enough if you aren't doing backups, yet so worried about your /home data you think it's going to be the installer that nukes it. -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
