On Thu, Jun 21, 2018, at 9:41 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>
> Well, as *additional* variant it doesn't provide that much value.  More
> interesting would be to create all x86 cloud images that way, so they
> boot just fine on both bios and efi, and we don't have to bother
> creating two image variants.

We aren't creating two[1] image variants today.  Why would we?  Who
would use them and why?

> Why do you need that?  Wouldn't FAH just drop a new file for the new
> version into /boot/loader/entries on updates?  So you have old and new
> version listed in the boot menu and can easily rollback to the old
> version if needed?

The entire design of libostree is around being able to transactionally
swap the bootloader configuration.  While preparing an update, we
temporarily have *three* deployments on disk (new, current, and rollback),
but only two bootloader entries.  If we weren't able to do a full
transactional replacement then we'd have to deal with possibly
having three entries, and be able to clean that up afterwards.
Which we could do - particularly now that we have
https://github.com/ostreedev/ostree/pull/1464
and it's easier for admins to control what's available locally, and we
can assume that we can just GC other things.

[1] For BIOS/UEFI - clearly there are a ton of image variants in general
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/H3O7QDPZWA4YXIWNSJOHFHJKOZKJC2SW/

Reply via email to