On Sat, 2014-01-25 at 17:54 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: > 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.
What about mail application change the format of the mail folders ? It happens, and it is *not* data you want to risk throwing away. There are many other examples like this especially on the server side. Simo. -- Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
