Uwe Dippel wrote: > [i]I thought LU was supposed to be "safe" :-( [/i] > > Alas, that's the one thing that it is not. (Just search the archives, if in > doubt.) > I'm not working for SUN, only summarize what I picked up on the way here: > LU was bought from a third party, cannot be redistributed therefore, is > maintained only, and will be replaced by a new system as soon as possible; at > least for OpenSolaris. > That's not exactly true. The fact it that OpenSolaris has a completely different packaging and installation system, therefore LU is simply not relevant to it. There are NO redistribution issues with LU, there's just no point. :-)
> It works okay, if it works, and especially it does so on ZFS. We have > analysed it, and found some conceptual limitations and some promises. At > least, compared to all other OSes, LU is a great step into the correct > direction: Upgrades should be easy, and done on a clone of the system, 'on > the system', without touching the original. That would be a show-stealer. > Unfortuantely, the latter (not touching the original) is far from true for > LU, and that's why it cannot be "safe". > > This really depends on what you consider to be the "not touching the original". Other than requiring that you update the LU packages before upgrade, the ONLY thing that LU will change is the record of what your boot environments are which unfortunately live within the BE. It would be impossible not to change it. (Think about it). The fact is that you can ALWAYS recover your original boot environment. The most painful thing that you'd ever need to do is re-install grub to get the system to point at your old BE, and that's the worst case scenario. And that's why it is "SAFE". > Uwe > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3237 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/install-discuss/attachments/20090316/663f0a45/attachment.bin>
