On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Przemek Klosowski <przemek.klosowski@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 03/05/2013 01:28 PM, Colin Walters wrote: >> >> On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 13:17 -0500, seth vidal wrote: >> >>> If the issue was only 'newer is better' then rpm can easily get around >>> it. Hell, so can yum, now. > > ... > >>> So - I don't see how adding another layer is really a problem - since >>> the 'infinite versions in every direction' won't help our users losing >>> their configs or worse their data. >>> >>> am I missing something here? >> >> >> Yes - that we don't need to solve the user data problem for all software >> immediately to support rolling back a Mesa upgrade. > > > I thought that the current plan was to use BTRFS to snapshot the system > before updates, and revert on failure. Of course this implies losing new > data, which is I guess better than a priori unknowable corruption. That plan depends on btrfs being dependable enough to deploy everywhere and snapshots working. That won't happen anytime soon. It's also just working around the problem with another layer. josh -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
