Re: packages with hook interfaces and no documented hook policy
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Ian Jackson
<ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Olaf van der Spek writes ("Re: packages with hook interfaces and no documented hook policy"):
>> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Michael Vogt <mvo@debian.org> wrote:
>> > If you have better suggestions how to solve this problem, I'm happy to
>> > hear (and implement) them. Until then I would recomment that you run
>> > the upgrade manually so that you have control over when exactly it
>> > happens.
>>
>> An alternative would be to ensure upgrades can be aborted at any
>> moment (always a good idea to avoid problems after (unexpected)
>> crashes).
>
> This is of course supposed to be the case, since no-one actually tests
> it I doubt it is true. See also giant flameware over filesystem bugs.
Ted says there's no use case for it. So maybe people from Debian,
other distros and upstream developers could discuss this together and
then get back to Ted.
> Also making this true would involve making sure that the kernel we are
> hibernating from is always available and selected by default when we
> do the next boot, so that we don't fail the resume due to kernel
> mismatch.
Shouldn't that be done anyway?
Otherwise hibernates will fail after some kernel upgrades.
--
Olaf
Reply to: