On Jan 25, 2014, at 4:12 PM, Adam Williamson <awill...@redhat.com> wrote: > > * Do an offline update that includes Foo v2.0 > * Boot the updated system, run Foo, it migrates its configuration to > some new scheme > * Realize there was something wrong with the update, roll it back > * Run Foo again, find it doesn't work because it's been migrated to the > new config scheme which the old version of Foo doesn't work with
I would grumble, but a configuration file being updated and made incompatible with the prior version would be tolerated. Ideally the application makes an unmodified copy. If it doesn't, new school restore with --reflink from snapshot, regular cp if using LVM thinp snapshots, and old school just restore the file from a conventional backup. Not such a big deal. If it's something far less throw away than configuration files being changed, it's a bit more complicated how badly and quickly the conversation degrades. But I can hardly recall a recent example of this happening. It's just not that common in my experience. Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
