On 26/02/17 05:42 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
All /usr must be controlled by the snapshot-rollback mechanism.
I disagree. There is no need for, for example, /usr/share/man and a lot more. it looks to me as if all of /usr/share can be excluded. That's "by design". Back when, Bell's USG came up with /usr/share so that the server could have t and make it accessible as NFS to all the other machines. You really think a couple of dozen of the GPL statements are essential to the boot process and will need to be rolled back? Somewhere along the line you need to draw a boundary between what gets dealt with by snapper and what gets dealt with by the regular backup process. I would think that a system whereby pam_snapper took a snapshot of the user's workspace upon and only upon login, plus and changes that were saved (sort of like when you edit using VAX VMS) would be a lot more useful than the defaults we have now. Yes snapper on /boot and /lib/modules and /etc/ makes sense when you upgrade a kernel and it won't boot, but in the real world in a commercial setting, as a professional sysadmin, dealing with users who say "I deleted a file, Can I get it back?" is more realistic. I've been facing that as a sysadmin since the late in70s. And somewhere along the line this shifted to "But I can recover a deleted file on my MS-DOS (or later on, Windows) system, why can't I do that with UNIX/Linux?" Explaining about shared resource and someone else has since grabbed their discarded data block gets no sympathy. Every user is the centre of his own universe and that's all that matters to him/her. Just saying ... -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org