On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The current GNOME update workflow, however, is the most reliable we
have, because it downloads the updates then boots to a minimal systemd
target with as few things running as possible to install the updates,
then boots back to the normal system. This is far, far safer than
running the update inside a desktop.
Interesting... since I don't use GNOME that is probably why I wasn't aware of this.
I found this:
From what I've read so far, KDE does not do "offline" updates.... I'm still researching so maybe that has changed, but in the above mentioned thread, KDE did not support it.
I understand the theoretical exposure, but I guess what I'm missing is how offline updates eliminates that risk? There is still a plethora of things which could
interfere with a normal completion of the update process. Seems to me it would be more worthwhile to build in better error recovery within DNF than to always require "offline" - especially
since the incidence of failure (at least anecdotally) just isn't that high. Instead of dealing with the problem (failed updates and error recovery) - this approach just tries to avoid it by always requiring
a reboot. Kind of defeats the purpose of being able to update a kernel without a reboot, if your going to always reboot for other updates - and of course the majority of updates don't require a reboot.
IMHO the risk/benefit ratio is way off on this approach to the problem - but hey, that's just me - and I'm a KDE user who isn't using it.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
