On 5/2/24 16:28, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2024-05-02 at 15:41 -0400, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote:
On 5/2/24 14:34, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
While I follow the philosophy of updating
regularly, there are likely some who install Fnn, and
never update, and then would expect an update to
Fnn+2 to work without issue(s).
--
The CLI update strongly suggests doing 'dnf update --refresh' before
system-upgrade. It doesn't require it though.
I always thought it's an odd workflow; why doesn't it just force it?
While it might take a long while to complete on a stale system, it's
recommended anyway, isn't it?
I would actually hugely prefer we amend that to say `dnf --refresh
offline-upgrade download; dnf offline-upgrade reboot` or so. It's a
footgun as it stands.
Even though my personal feet are unscathed by great many online
upgrades, I agree it's a low-probability but high-potential-for-damage
event. Having said that, in the case of system upgrade, a lot of
problems of online upgrades (IPC and ABI incompatibilities, etc) are
not very relevant---the system will instantly reboot for the upgrade, right?
The bottom line is I am old-school and hate rebooting and the associated
loss of 'state', but OTOH most important user-oriented applications save
and restore state already. It's just feels inelegant and ad-hoc, but
may be the price of progress.
I wonder if this means that ostree / CoreOS / Silverblue are the only
way out of this conundrum.
--
_______________________________________________
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
