"Colin Walters" <walters@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2022, at 12:00 PM, Robbie Harwood wrote: > >> If your model doesn't permit the system to cease execution during >> bootloader updates, then I'm not sure why you need bootupd at all - >> traditional RPM updating will work just fine (assuming the A/B change >> we've been talking about). But the "Questions and answers" section >> doesn't read that way to me: it mentions that "forcibly pulling the >> power during OS updates" is a case ostree wants to support and doesn't >> explicitly negate that for the bootloader. > > There's lots of nuance going on here. What both bootupd and your shim > prototype are doing is effectively moving the "payload" into /usr and > not have RPM directly writing to /efi (or /boot/efi, wherever it's > mounted). No, the install script install script in an RPM trigger, so the write is still carried out by RPM. > This also then directly leads into a next issue: > https://github.com/coreos/bootupd/issues/50 Basically, `rpm -q shim` > becomes a lie - or at least, starts to mean something else[1]. I don't agree. Just because a user can mess with files on the system doesn't mean the rpmdb is a lie, nor is it reasonable to go recheck all paths on the filesystem just in case they've done so, or create a daemon to provide an interface for doing that. Be well, --Robbie
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
