Re: It's official: Linux has become Microsoft Windows

[Susan Cragin]

And it's going to get worse. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/424927 Sadly, I'm quite excited about the brain f*#k scheduler. Susan -----Original Message----- From: Shawn O'Shea Sent: Oct 16, 2009 7:36 PM To: Greater NH Linux User Group Subject: Re: It's official: Linux has become Microsoft Windows Along similar lines to Ben's original link, apparently stability problems in Ubuntu have frustrated the Eeebuntu developer to the point that he is giving up on maintaining Eee utils for Ubuntu for the EePC. http://www.fewt.com/2009/10/i-give-up.html -Shawn On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Coleman Kane <ck...@colemankane.org> wrote: On Fri, 2009-10-16 at 10:59 -0400, Tom Buskey wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:47 PM, Ben Scott <dragonh...@gmail.com> > wrote: >          This is actually from 2005, but I just found it now: > >         https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/desktop-bugs/2005-August/002500.html > >          Yes, that's right.  Rather than fix broken software, the >         sanctioned >         course of action is to reboot the system if HAL or DBus need >         to be >         restarted/refreshed. > >          Can anyone recommend a Free, Unix-like operating system that >         supports a wide variety of hardware?  That used to be Linux, >         but it >         now fails on the second item. > > > NetBSD comes closest, especially for CPU architectures.  FreeBSD might > beat NetBSD for peripherals.  I'm not sure if OpenBSD is head of > OpenSolaris.  Darwin is another possibility. > > Of course, these are Unix systems and you asked for Unix-like (which > linux technically is). > > Haiku probably isn't unix-like enough.  Is Hurd far enough along yet? > Debian on BSD or Hurd? > > What about a Linux distro that doesn't use HAL or DBus.  Slackware? I think you're confusing "all of Linux" with Ubuntu. The subject should be "Ubuntu has become Microsoft Windows", or maybe even "GNOME has become Microsoft Windows". In my case, I am not using GDM or XDM or any of the other *DMs, and instead just run X from the command line. If I upgrade hald or dbus, I simply log out of X11 (Using GNOME's "System->Log out ..."), then run startx again. No reboot necessary. This is running on FreeBSD, of course. Some of you might argue that this amounts to a reboot. Let me assure you, from a time-consumed perspective it most certainly does not. Ubuntu gratuitously seems to want a reboot for any upgrade of a service process running in X, or in the init system. This seems to be a heavy-handed anti-foot-shooting measure intended to ensure a stable experience at the expense of some efficiency. As far as all the complaints go in that issue, there is still one striking difference between Ubuntu and Microsoft Windows: You, the user, are empowered to fix the behavior if you don't like it so much, because you have access to the source code to the whole system. Ubuntu doesn't *have to* be restarted after every invasive upgrade, if you would just add the code to those packages that would fix the problem. I'm certain that there's even a boilerplate recipe out there for this exact problem that applies to both hald and dbus. The only reason Ubuntu opts for this is the same 80/20 rule that Microsoft employs: For 20% more rebooting, you can avoid 80% of the work that would need to be performed to achieve a fully no-reboot-necessary-on-upgrade OS. -- Coleman Kane _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

_______________________________________________
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/