On
07/06/2009 08:21 PM, David Siegel wrote:
Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
Alex Launi
wrote:
On Sat, Jul 4,
2009 at 4:03 AM, Mark Shuttleworth <mark@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:mark@xxxxxxxxxx>>
wrote:
Updates-on-login are interesting, but I think fatally flawed
because of the common requirement to reboot after updates.
This is actually the case where update on login works best. Any other
time rebooting is totally interruption. You're working, you need to
decide whether or not rebooting is important enough, and then if you do
decide to reboot, you need to save all of your state, and actually do
the deed. Immediately after boot you don't have this problem. Instead
of starting to work and then being disturbed, you delay starting until
you can really start, without interruption.
's a fair point.
Also, as there is no user state before login, we can reboot the machine
without user confirmation. With fast-boot and KMS, we completely remove
the pain from rebooting after updates -- in fact, the user probably
won't even notice the reboot (we should suppress startup sounds on the
reboot).
This is a really good point. We would do well to remember that users
don't get frustrated simply at rebooting, their frustration is delaying
their ability to
*use* their desktop. Time and the
appearance of more time is the source of the problem with rebooting,
not the fact that a machine needs to cycle due to a kernel update or
whatever.