Re: Two more concrete ideas for what a once-yearly+update schedule would look like

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, 09 Dec 2016 08:44:26 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:

> On Fri, 2016-12-09 at 13:18 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > The apparently random flow of poorly tested "rushed out" updates  
> 
> <citation needed>

Nah, not needed at all. Basically, one can update a desktop workstation to
death, if applying updates too often or not at the right time. Then you
suffer from updates causing regression, if not searching for an even newer
update in the updates-testing repo, where pulling out individual packages
isn't safe. One faces a growing number of issues, systemd waiting for
timeouts during poweroff/reboot, SELinux errors or warnings, GNOME Shell
logging you out, applications failing to render or refusing to work,
Firefox crashing, ABRT collecting unusable crash data daily, DNF being
unable to perform history undo, because packages are not found in the
repos anymore. You can find failure reports from users, who haven't
updated their installation for weeks, then applied 200 or more updates at
once and afterwards couldn't log in anymore. And if updating to
updates-testing, there are still packagers, who delete their bodhi pages,
so eventually you notice that a distro-sync wants to downgrade updates
that have been deleted "silently" (why? negative karma?  severe
breakage?).
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux