packages requiring me to reboot...

Ralf Corsepius rc040203 at
Thu Dec 17 04:05:45 UTC 2009

On 12/16/2009 06:34 PM, Seth Vidal wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, nodata wrote:
>> Am 2009-12-16 18:21, schrieb Seth Vidal:
>>> On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, nodata wrote:
>>>>> we're talking about the experienced user who is comfortable knowing
>>>>> what
>>>>> does and does not need a reboot.
>>>>> All I'm saying is - we've not taken away any option, the experienced
>>>>> user can do what they want.
>>>>> -sv
>>>> True, but the default should be sensible.
>>> And the default is sensible for the inexperienced user:
>>> Don't try to explain to the user how to restart the apps individually,
>>> tell them to bounce the box and it will be the right version when it
>>> comes back.
>>> -sv
>> On the other hand I think requiring more reboots than Windows is a bad
>> thing...
> Then I can think of a couple of solutions to this problem:
> 1. Have fewer update pushes per release - this is something I'm actively
> advocating and I think is possible
Depends on what you actually have in mind.

Simply letting update pile up would seem a silly idea to me, it 
contradicts Fedora's goal and removes what makes Fedora "attractive".

Letting pile up "updates, which require a reboot, but are not addressig 
real bugs", could be applicable.

> 2. Match up more updates to a specific running app so we can see if the
> reboot is really necessary at all. - something else I've wrriten some
> code in support of.
Yes, this would be helpful - But only in case of non-bugfix updates.

Bug-fix updates should be pushed ASAP, IMO.

3. Having better tools to avoid reboots.
(Consider daemons, servers).

4. Maintainers to be more careful/reluctant/conservative, when 
considering to update packages, which require a reboot.


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list