On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 20:06:38 +0200
Christian Boltz
Hello,
(hmm, should we open a board-support mailinglist? ;-)
Woosh! Sorry, I don't understand that comment. In particular, what is a 'board' in this context?
Am Samstag, 27. April 2019, 09:40:03 CEST schrieb Axel Braun:
I updated TW this morning, and now it looks like this (shortened):
# | Typ | before# | Date | Space | Descript. -----+--------+---------+--------------------+------------+----------- -- 0 | single | | | | current 549* | single | | Sa 30 Mär 21:17:16 | 21,11 MiB | 573 | post | 568 | Mo 22 Apr 10:12:32 | 25,21 MiB | 574 | pre | | Fr 26 Apr 19:04:58 | 368,00 KiB | zypp(zypper) 575 | post | 574 | Fr 26 Apr 19:05:02 | 208,00 KiB | 576 | pre | | Fr 26 Apr 19:38:44 | 192,00 KiB | yast fonts 577 | post | 576 | Fr 26 Apr 19:39:09 | 384,00 KiB | 578 | pre | | Fr 26 Apr 19:39:18 | 96,00 KiB | yast sudo 579 | post | 578 | Fr 26 Apr 19:39:51 | 16,00 KiB | 580 | pre | | Fr 26 Apr 19:39:58 | 16,00 KiB | yast alt. 581 | post | 580 | Fr 26 Apr 19:40:10 | 816,00 KiB | 582 | pre | | Sa 27 Apr 08:33:06 | 11,93 MiB | zypp(zypper) 583 | post | 582 | Sa 27 Apr 08:43:46 | 10,82 MiB |
That gives some insghts: - Still 549 is mounted!
Yes, of course.
When using the "usual"/"traditional" setup, you can think of the additional snapshots as "backups" that are done before and after installing packages etc. As every good backup, they are hopefully superfluous and get thrown away sooner or later ;-)
The snapshot that gets used will only change if you use "snapper rollback". (And I guess you used "snapper rollback" in the past, because otherwise you'd have #1 instead of #549 mounted at /.)
This confuses me. Surely if any snapshot is in use it will be the latest one after the last zypper action? Otherwise, it doesn't correspond to my idea of what yast or zypper do. How can the running system precede the latest changes? What would happen if I rolled back to snapshot 549? Shouldn't that be an older, different state?
The longer version of this is on https://www.susecon.com/doc/2015/sessions/HO20031.pdf (which I abused ;-) for a btrfs talk in my LUG recently - thanks Thorsten!)
TL;DR
There's also the option to use transactional updates
But IIRC, using Tx updates is not a good idea? [snip]
- 574/575 are from a removal of some packages. - 576-581 result from starting some YaST modules *without performing changes*. This is IMHO nonsense, aka a bug - there is no need for a snapshot unless I changes something
Agreed in theory.
In practise, some YaST modules do their changes not only at the very end, but also if you click specific buttons, so creating a snapshot at the end would be too late. This also means that doing the snapshots when starting and exiting a YaST module is the easiest way. I wouldn't be surprised if this is done in the "global" YaST code and not even module-specific.
I agree that the pre-snapshot has to be taken 'pre' otherwise there's no point. But if the yast session is abandoned surely the correct action to take is to remove the pre snapshot, not create an essentially unchanged after snapshot as well?
That said - if you want to get rid of these superfluous snapshots, feel free to open a bugreport - I'd say it's a valid bug ;-)
Does that mean you agree with me?
On the positive side, creating a "superfluous" snapshot is "cheap", so there'n not too much harm done. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-support+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-support+owner@opensuse.org