[BadVista Advocate] Portland Project Linux

[Sunnz]

Hehe, about BSOD:

http://www.miguelcarrasco.net/miguelcarrasco/2006/10/blue_screen_of_.html

2007/5/2, Don Hensley <Don at donhensley.com>:
>
> Yes that's the reliability part - real uptime.
>
> But for those of us that actually work (or in my case worked) in the field,
> there are simply many, way to many to list, reasons for having to reboot a
> GNU/Linux box.
>
> Here's at least 3 or 4 examples on just this one page (I picked this page
> because it was handy for me, I'll bet you could Google many more such pages):
>
> http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-5-manual/Deployment_Guide-en-US/sec-sel-admincontrol.html
>
> And there are literally hundreds, probably thousands, of other perfectly valid
> reasons to reboot a GNU/Linux box.
>
> Quite a lot of them have to do with the state of proc which very often
> requires a full reboot to reflect the change in state of one thing or
> another.
>
> BTW, this is a real problem to get through to people at times, because the box
> is running just fine - and may continue to run just fine... but one or more
> changes may not be reflected in that running state until after a full reboot.
> This may leave the box unstable, or at risk to some attack vector.
>
> Now Crashes that require a reboot are much more rare, but I've seen thousands
> of kernel panic conditions that were not fully recoverable from, without a
> reboot.
>
> BUT: You will never see a "Blue Screen of Death" on a GNU/Linux box (except as
> a joke screen saver or as funny wallpaper).
>
> Don.
>  ******************************
>  On Tuesday 01 May 2007 07:29 am, Michael D. Stemle, Jr. wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 May 2007 05:50:09 Don Hensley wrote:
> > Actually there are many conditions that will require a full reboot of any
> > GNU/Linux computer.
> >
> > Most changes (especially those that go well) do not require reboots, this
> > much is true.
> >
> > Where the legendary reliability of GNU/Linux comes into play is in the fact
> > that they can have astounding up time, unlike most Windows systems.
> >
> > But anyone with any real hands on experience with operating systems will
> > tell you that troubles can and do occur. And if it's bad enough it will
> > require a reboot - no matter what the operating system is.
> >
> > But it will happen much, much, much, less often with GNU/Linux.
> >
> > Don.
> >  *****************************
> >  On Tuesday 01 May 2007 03:17 am, Sunnz wrote:
> > Of course, you don't really need to reboot just because you changed
> > "something". Unless it is the kernel.
>
> The only time I ever reboot my wife's machine is when I upgrade to a new
> version of Kubuntu or we go out of town and I think I can save some dough on
> the power bill.
>
> --
> GNU/Linux is the future.
> Join the FSF: http://www.fsf.org/register_form?referrer=4458
> Get the Real Facts: http://BadVista.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Advocate mailing list
> Advocate at badvista.org
> http://badvista.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/advocate
>


-- 
Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html