1707
Funtastic 😅
(endlesstalk.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
1707 points (96.9% liked)
Memes
45550 readers
1845 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
To this day, I still don't understand what takes windows updates so dam long. Not sure about Mac, but Linux takes, what, 5 minutes at most if you've gone a while.
This is a byproduct of one of the largest and more ignored differences between windows and linux. The fact that Linux let's you modify files while they are open whereas windows doesn't.
This means that you can update a linux system by just replacing the files with the new ones while it runs. On the other side, Windows can't modify its own files while it runs, so instead it has a second entire OS to update itself, and requires a reboot to unload all the files and boot from the updater without locking windows files.
In some sense this would even seem an advantage of Windows. (I know it's the fundamental reason for many hangs and freezes, but the idea that a file is a lockable resource doesn't seem that bad.)
There is flock/fcntl for you. But locking is bad for performance too, especially in multithreaded enviroments.
Yes, the thing is - it's a choice.
Then there is cooperative locking for you. It becomes a choice.
I think files being locked is really intuitive, which greatly helps new users. Allowing files to be modified or deleted while they are open makes it really easy to shoot yourself in the foot. For example in the video of Linus switching to Linux he was uncompressing a file and tried to open it while it was still uncompressing, which failed since the file wasn't complete. He didn't understand why the file wasnt uncompressing correctly. That can't happen on Windows, since the file being uncompressed would be locked.
I think there should be a 'lockable mode', and for distributions oriented to new users the home directory should be mounted like that.
There IS 'lockable mode' since System V era. It is extensively used by package managers and similar stuff.
Deleting file does not actually deletes it from disk until last program closes it. And there are ways to open file such that changes to file will not be seen in program.
Yeah with "lockable mode" I mean locking by default instead of requiring every program to specifically call for locking.
It would probably break lots of software, but only using such mode for the users home (or maybe even specific Downloads/documents/desktop/etc folders within the home directory) could reduce the impact.
[Edit] wait I think there is whole fs locking mode on mounting, with the "mand" option, going to test it.
ReplaceFileexists to get everyone else's semantics though?Silverblue also does this, yet updates are really quick
No, silverblue does all the work before you restart the computer, and the actual work doesn't involve replacing the OS itself but basically downloading some files and just checking a different git branch when booting.
Mac updates are less frequent but take longer. They also restart the machine. One difference though is that my mac never took it upon itself to start an update without asking my opinion.
/laughs in company enforced updates/
First they nag you. Then they nag even more. Then they blur out everything making your system unusable unless you hit update.
And it's all done with style, looking good while closing in on ya
Edit: you seem to have a pair of spare / /
May i borrow them?
I somehow lost mine.
¯_(ツ)_¯
Sure. Knock yourself out
\ \ \ / / /
Thanks - now i'm complete
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
One company I worked at had a weird customization for both Windows and Dell UEFI updates, and this shit was super intrusive, basically you could skip it only once, and then it'd count down to the update even if you're on an important Teams meeting
Lack of proper package management is my assumption.
I hear it takes a long time on Macs too!
thankfully I don't have this problem on my Gentoo
I'd be using Gentoo if not for installing software being something you have to plan for.
"Sorry boss I can't come into work today, I need to install important security updates on my fifteen arch and/or gentoo desktops and servers."
Exactly.
Very true for mainstream distros, but there's more: Linux updates in the background. No matter how long it takes(if you for example use Gentoo), there is zero downtime. And with kexec your system can be its own bootloader and can do insane stuff like starting new kernel without re-running POST, which is on servers is very important(because they have shitty BIOS that takes ages to boot).
Mac updates are usually at least a GB in my experience, they take a while
They have no packages but do a full patch of the system data. Since this is the most complex approach and almost everything can go wrong down to the core they spend most of the time with checking and cleaning state.
Sometimes I won't use Tumbleweed for a few months then boot it up and it will update every package on the system (literally full reinstall of the os and all installed software) faster than Windows can search for updates. What the heck?
and on linux you can upgrade while the system is running and then reboot
The Nintendo Switch is the gold standard of updates for me.
Can't remember a windows update taking longer than 5 minutes. And even if it did take that long, you can just press "update and shutdown" when you stop using the pc. Windows has a lot of problems but this isn't one of them.
A lot of it happens in the backgound. It is at least a 15-30 minute process from start to finish. Very annoying if you have an older computer as it is sucks up a lot of resources updating during the background updates.
I normally don't ever shutdown or restart my desktop. I like leaving program and stuff running so I can continue what I am doing when I get back. With an update I have to close out all of my shit and then shutdown and open everything back up.
I also swear when you have updates pending on a restart the computer doesn't run very well.
I see now. I have pretty beefy computer so I haven't noticed that. I also shutdown my computer every night so it's still not problem for me.
Another issue is that windows will eventually force a reboot on you with pending updates. You can postpone it for a while, but eventually you'll be in the middle of something and it will just do it anyways.
This is, in some regards, similar to rape...
Edit: to clarify,
Hopefully, we'll agree that rape is much worse, but the underlying principle is the same: some entity abuses something you own - your body/property. Since you're the owner, you exclusively should be in control.
Unfortunately, it can sometimes be necessary to leave an abusive partner/OS. This can be challenging if you "need" one but they're all evil and dominating. M$ is not abusing its users as violently as some people are abusing their partners. However, their subtle abuse of their users takes place on a much bigger scale. Not only in this (pretty unimportant) regard, but also by e.g. unwanted telemetry/tracking. Luckily, non-abusive partners of the Linux family are becoming easier to find and date, and many are already flirting with one or more of them.
Bruh what
You heard him, its RAPE!
I've clarified my answer.
If your computer is always running it may never take longer than five minutes. But try to leave your computer shut down for a month or more. Then updates accumulate and it can take really long to make them.