On 19 January 2023 10:32:04 CET, Andreas Beckmann <a...@debian.org> wrote: >On 17/01/2023 18.27, Diederik de Haas wrote: >> It seems fine to print (in all caps afaic) that there is an issue. > >That tends to get overlooked ... in the middle of a thousand packages being upgraded ...
I said ALL CAPS and there are more ways to decorate it which make it REALLY stands out. Does that mean that someone will still miss it? Yes. And that would be entirely their fault. The number of times I've seen people on #debian-next break their Sid system is truly mindboggling. And every time it's because they couldn't be arsed to read the feedback the system gave them. "This action* will remove your entire DE. Do you want to continue?" <Enter> *) usually dist-upgrade "Hey! I just did an upgrade and now my DE is broken! What should I do?" "Downgrade to the version in Testing" "No. I run Sid, not Testing" "Yeah. You probably shouldn't bc you apparently don't know how to do that. Still, the solution is to downgrade to the Testing version. Alternatively you can get the older version from snapshot.d.o, but getting them from Testing tends to be much easier" "I'm not going to do that, because I run Sid!" "Enjoy your broken Sid system then. Sid, where if it breaks you get to keep all the pieces." I really wish this was some fictional story I pulled out of my arse. But no, this is a paraphrasing of several actual conversations I had in the last few weeks. And yesterday someone's Sid system was broken because of some (aufs) dkms module whose source needs to be updated for the brand new kernel that was uploaded to Sid. So this problem only occurs to people who run Sid, but REALLY shouldn't. And it would be good if they actually end up with a broken system as that's likely the only way they'll learn. btw: upgrading a *1000* packages is not a realistic scenario. It might happen when people dist-upgrade from one Stable release to the next. And then the following 2 things are also true: - The dkms module should be compatible for a while now as the Stable kernel version exists for a while - They do such an upgrade without looking for potential issues ?!? >We must not silently create an unbootable system. Agreed. Hence my suggestion to use ALL CAPS so the issue is shouted at them. ****************************************** * WARNING: * * Potentially UNBOOTABLE issue occurred: * * <reason> * ****************************************** And IMO for those l33t h@xx0rs who're running Sid, because running a Rolling Release is what their fellow Reddit-l33r-h@xx0rs do too, really are best served with an unbootable system (in this case). Recovering from that is a really useful exercise and they should learn to actually read the (generally very clear) feedback the system gives them. It generally takes me a few *seconds* to spot the issue. My 0.02
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
