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

[Reindl Harald]

Am 27.01.2014 01:32, schrieb Chris Murphy:
> On Jan 26, 2014, at 5:20 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> wrote:
>> Am 27.01.2014 01:18, schrieb Chris Murphy:
>>> You gave several examples of rollback-snapshot methods - same thing as you suggested them. I never said you requested them
>>
>> oh my god - i gave several examples *what could be dangerous* in doing that
>> i *never* ever suggested them
>> please re-read the thread and then come back with an excuse
> 
> "suggested them" can mean two things in English: you recommend them, or they are examples. I mean the 2nd case. I understand that you were not ever recommending your examples. You were suggesting them as examples why snapshots in general are bad.
> 
> The problem is that your examples are crap. They're bad examples because they would break the system, therefore no one would actually do snapshots-rollbacks per your examples, unless they wanted to blow up their system.

boah the fact "therefore no one would actually do snapshots-rollbacks per your examples" needs to be proven
i only just warned about cases where a rollback would do harm and to *make sure* that really no one would
do it without take care

so where is now the point you started a flamewar against me instead
be quite or say "ok, that would be bad and hopefully does not happen"

this is a *dvelopent dicussion* and the goal of it is to *prevent*
mistakes ever happen *before* they are implemented or widely used

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 246 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20140127/60a1bf20/attachment-0001.sig>