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/