On Donnerstag 01 Januar 2009, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 12:27:48 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > > > Don't you think the default action here should be to do nothing > > > > instead of > > > > breaking my system? > > > > > > "That proposal is ludicrous and completely counter to the Unix > > > way of doing things." > > > > > > Not my opinion, just quoting. > > > > nice one :-) > > > > The Unix way is to do what the user told it to do, no more and no less. > > > > If you tell the system to install a driver, ignore the prompt or even > > type "y", why are users constantly surprised when the system does > > exactly what they told it to do? What's the computer supposed to say? > > Except in this case, portage knew the action was risky but issued the > warning after the event "you really shouldn't have done that", like a > typical smartarse with20:20 hindsight. > > There are numerous examples of ebuilds that stop if an upgrade is risky, > postfix is one such, and provide the user with the an option to > carry on if they choose, usually be setting an environment variable. > > I really don't see the point in an ebuild making this sort of test and > then continuing to install anyway.
but as long as X is not restarted, the upgrade doesn't break anything. You come back, you read the elogs, you downgrade the drivers and everything is fine and dandy.
