3 ms·

Fedora CoreOS has phased updates, too. But being atomic updates of the whole distribution there is no risk of inconsistencies between packages. Either your mach

Fedora CoreOS has phased updates, too. But being atomic updates of the whole distribution there is no risk of inconsistencies between packages. Either your machine has the new version or not. And the user can choose a priority, do they want updates early or late, so you can run a canary. Not a convincing feature from Ubuntu with such poor tooling, limited user choice and no logging.

stingraycharles 4y ago
Maybe, but there’s still some state in eg config files that persists over upgrades. If there are incompatibilities there, you’ll still have issues, so it’s not a silver bullet.
AshamedCaptain 4y ago
It's not possible to get inconsistencies here either unless you force it, which is kind of the intention.
- usr1106 4y ago
  Given that no bugs exist, it's not possible to get inconsistencies by installing packages in random order because they declare their dependencies. If no bugs existed we would not need updates at all...
  - p4l4g4 4y ago
    That's why we only allow RFC9225 compliant packages on our systems!
  - AshamedCaptain 4y ago
    And assuming bugs exist, you can get inconsistencies everywhere, so I fail to see the point of this message.