Please don't drop me from Cc when replying. I know the list has a misguided setup, but mailers can be configured to ignore that. Thanks.
http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html On Wed, 2017-02-01 at 12:13 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 4:55 AM, David Woodhouse <dw...@infradead.org> wrote: > > My server at home broke on upgrading to Fedora 22 (#1201962), and also > > on upgrading to Fedora 20 before that (IIRC). > > That's a while ago, the system upgrade method is different now. At > least on workstation it's using systemd offline update to do the major > version upgrade, same as minor updates. So if it's able to do minor > updates without breaking, it should be able to do the major one > successfully. Whether there may be a bug that prevents a successfully > upgraded system from booting - well that's what testing is for. I'm not sure the upgrade method matters, does it? In both cases I think it was changes to dracut and the way raid was assembled (perhaps moving from automatically in the kernel to doing it in userspace, or vice versa). > > So let's please ensure that we have proper > > test coverage for existing systems. > > Please describe your proposal for ensuring proper test coverage, in > particular if you personally aren't able to test what is by definition > a custom layout? Nono, this *isn't* a custom layout. It's a fairly standard RAID setup. But if we change the defaults, then I suppose that retrospectively *makes* it a "custom layout"... at least in the sense that we can reasonably expect it to keep breaking every release or two :(
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
