Snapshotting for rollback after updates was[ Re: Drawing lessons from fatal SELinux bug #1054350]

Reindl Harald h.reindl at
Mon Jan 27 00:11:15 UTC 2014

Am 27.01.2014 00:57, schrieb Kevin Fenzi:
> I don't think this subthread is being particularly useful... 
> And the personal attacks are undesirable. 
> Please stop or at least take it to private email

*sorry* for not early enough realize trolling in first start with
the same argumentation as Simon and me to later fight against it
while now claim i came up with the idea of snapshots while
warning all the time and tried to explain Chris *why* i

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
Betreff: Re: Drawing lessons from fatal SELinux bug #1054350
Datum: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 16:42:13 -0700
Von: Chris Murphy <lists at>
Antwort an: Development discussions related to Fedora <devel at>
An: Development discussions related to Fedora <devel at>

I don't follow this. The realization an update is bad doesn't necessarily occur right away. So we still need a way
to separate system domain vs user domain, at least, so that system files are rolled back separately from user files


can someone *please stop that troll telling lies*

> And then you propose a ridonkulous snapshot-rollback strategy that would for certain cause
> major problems if the rollback were actually done, and then use that as fait accompli for
> why the entire concept of fs rollbacks are stupid. Your arguments are asinine. Your emails
> belong in a kill file.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 246 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the devel mailing list