On 09/12/2017 05:36 AM, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
Apart from kernel updates there wasn't a need, IIRC, to reboot in earlier times. Read Tim: " ...rebooting has rarely been necessary after updates (beyond kernel updates), ever since I started using Linux (before Fedora existed)." Is he right or not? We have a choice: let Linux - or Fedora Linux at least - keep being what it is, namely a system (with what some see as an annoyance) that you better reboot after updates, or we try to find a way back to its status quo pro ante where there was no need to reboot. Our choice: I definitely won't complain, no matter what the Linux coders' or the Fedora management's choices will be. But let us at least get the fact straight: Linux, from how I understand the results of this debate, now *better* is getting rebooted after updates. This wasn't necessary in earlier times. Would you agree on these last two sentences, Sam, or anyone else?
I don't agree. I really don't think anything has changed. It has always been somewhat risky doing live upgrades, although it's possible that now more programs are doing runtime dynamic loading (plugins, etc.) which makes it extra risky. Either way, some users have been getting caught by these problems without knowing why, so there is now a way for those not so technical users to safely update their systems. The default method is safe. However, nothing has changed for those that believe they know what they are doing. There is no obstacle for them to continue doing live updates. I really don't see why this is such a big deal. I am happy that there is a safe way for my users (teachers, elementary students, my mom) to safely upgrade their computers without having to call me in. I usually do the release upgrades for them so I can keep most of them on the same release, but some of them have done that themselves as well.
_______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
