From: "Ulrich Ölmann" <u.oelmann@pengutronix.de>
To: rauc@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [RAUC] mark-active
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 15:20:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171205142046.sr2cfsy2ak2xcn6n@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1512471306.2219.17.camel@klsmartin.com>
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:55:18AM +0000, Middelschulte, Leif wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 05.12.2017, 10:14 +0100 schrieb Ulrich Ölmann:
> > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 08:01:11AM +0000, Middelschulte, Leif wrote:
> > > I was wondering about the intention of `mark-active [booted]`. Maybe I'm
> > > misinterpreting the docs[0] though.
> > >
> > > So here is the paragraph in question:
> > > "Last but not least, after switching to a different slot by mistake, this can
> > > be remedied by choosing booted as the argument which is, by the way, the
> > > default if the optional argument has been omitted."
> > >
> > > To me this appears missleading, as it reads like:
> > > "You (unintentionally) managed to boot the wrong slot and want to go back? Use
> > > `rauc status mark-active booted`!"
> > >
> > > But instead it will mark the currently (unintentionally booted) slot as the
> > > permanent primary [1], won't it?
> > >
> > > Maybe I'm just missing something here though.
> >
> > you are right, the documentation leaves enough room to interpret it like you
> > did. What I intended to say was that one can utilize the shortcut "booted" to
> > revoke an erroneous modification of the bootloader's state if one recognizes it
> > early enough and the system has not yet been shut down already. Hence the docs
> > should be updated to read
> >
> > "Last but not least, after switching to a different slot by mistake, before
> > having rebooted this can be remedied by choosing booted as the argument which
> > is, by the way, the default if the optional argument has been omitted."
> >
> > This should be precise enough to put away the ambiguity that you stumbled over.
> > Do you agree?
> Sounds good to me.
Created a corresponding pull request, see [1].
Best regards
Ulrich
[1] https://github.com/rauc/rauc/pull/194
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
RAUC mailing list
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-05 14:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-05 8:01 Middelschulte, Leif
2017-12-05 9:14 ` Ulrich Ölmann
2017-12-05 10:55 ` Middelschulte, Leif
2017-12-05 14:20 ` Ulrich Ölmann [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20171205142046.sr2cfsy2ak2xcn6n@pengutronix.de \
--to=u.oelmann@pengutronix.de \
--cc=rauc@pengutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox