On 09/12/2017 12:39 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
Then why, then, did sysadmins brag about the long uptimes of their
fully updated systems?
Because back then a host was probably an installation on bare metal that
was painstakingly set up by hand and preserved for as long as possible.
If you're buildin
On 09/12/2017 12:09 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 12 September 2017 at 19:02, Joe Zeff wrote:
This wasn't necessary in earlier times.
Two things:
* It was, but people mostly pretended that Linux was better than
Windows because the latter enforced it and the former didn't...
Then why, then,
On 12 September 2017 at 19:02, Joe Zeff wrote:
>> This wasn't necessary in earlier times.
Two things:
* It was, but people mostly pretended that Linux was better than
Windows because the latter enforced it and the former didn't...
* When it wasn't, it was because everything was less complicat
Rick,
Thanks very much for this information, and for all your help! With the
additional help of Mattias Ellert on the devel list, I was able to patch dillo
and submitted it as an update to testing.
Best wishes,
Ranjan
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 09:53:09 -0700 Rick Stevens wrote:
> On 09/06/2017 09:
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 n
On 09/12/2017 05:36 AM, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
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 know if Linux needs to be
On 09/06/2017 09:40 AM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Dillo's ssl support seems to be broken in F26 (and has been since the day it
> was released). Here is what happens:
>
> Go to https://www.nytimes.com/
>
> The webpage says that Dillo's prototype plugin for https support is disabled.
>
> I
On Tue, 2017-09-12 at 22:15 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> This is pretty much a ridiculous thread.
+1
[...]
> And pause that VM you "must" have running before you sleep.
Not always possible as I explained earlier, but mine is a corner case
and shouldn't affect the argument.
poc
__
On 09/12/17 21:19, Tim wrote:
> I'm not. Why are people trying to degrade Linux? Why are people
> defending that? Why are people saying it's necessary? It wasn't
> before. Why should it, *NOW*, become so.
I get the feeling that if it were possible to go back to previous versions of
say
"fed
Tim:
> > With the way Linux is getting worse and worse about this kind of
> > thing, I wonder if we're getting more and more programmers coming
> > over from the Windows world, where they just don't understand
> > what's wrong with that philosophy of computing. That, or it's
> > sabotage.
Samuel
On Tue, 2017-09-12 at 14:36 +0200, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
>
> 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,
The annoyance, meaning: the need to reboot, not Fedora
On Mon, 2017-09-11 at 23:11 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 09/11/2017 08:34 PM, Tim wrote:
> > With the way Linux is getting worse and worse about this kind of thing,
> > I wonder if we're getting more and more programmers coming over from
> > the Windows world, where they just don't understand wha
12 matches
Mail list logo
