On Mon, 17 Jul 2017 12:45:27 +0200 Michael Stahl <mstahl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 16.07.2017 14:10, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Debarshi Ray wrote: > >> How about reliable online updates of running applications as a > >> benefit? > > > > Upgrading RPM applications online just works. I do it all the time. > > The KDE tools do not even implement offline updates (and IMHO > > that's a good thing). The worst that can happen is that some > > recalcitrant applications (by far the minority) need to be > > restarted after updating (or if you upgraded the whole desktop, > > then your session may need to be restarted after updating). Until > > you do that, the current session may be "hosed" to some extent, but > > restarting will fix it. > > no, the worst case is this: > > https://www.happyassassin.net/2016/10/04/x-crash-during-fedora-update-when-system-has-hybrid-graphics-and-systemd-udev-is-in-update/ Anecdotal confirmation of the assertion in that link that running dnf (or formerly yum) from a virtual console is a good way to go. I've only done updates that way in stable versions since Fedora 3 and have never had an update issue because of the update process. In rawhide, I always run dnf updates that way, but without X running because of the less stable environment. Again, no update issues. I guess it's about balancing the level of risk with the cost of mitigating risk. How much is it worth in various dimensions to go another sigma lower in risk? For me, the above cost in process yields a risk I can live with. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
