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
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
