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
<dwmw2(a)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 :(