On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 02:37:21AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > Anyway, I don't see that this is a very good solution. Disabling all of the > available boot options for the system doesn't prevent incidental breakage, > it just changes the *kind* of incidental breakage you get. It makes it impossible to break by accident. It don't help against hand made breakages. This is a social problem which can't be fixed by a technical solution. > Anything that introduces the possibility of the system breaking on > reboot/power failure is *worse* than this. Hu? The kernel image have to be configured already. > > - Refuse to start on startup if no compatible version is found. > What does this mean, exactly? Should that be "upgrade" instead of > "startup"? And how does that help us improve users' experience when > upgrading? Okay, both. It have to fail without error on upgrades to not break the complete upgrade. Bastian -- He's dead, Jim. -- McCoy, "The Devil in the Dark", stardate 3196.1
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature