On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 00:27 +0200, Paul Ionescu wrote: > On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:00:50 -0500, Colin Walters wrote: > > > On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 23:29 +0100, Tom Parker wrote: > >> One of the things that NM has needed for a while is the ability to > >> properly handle Dbus disconnects, and to reconnect sanely. > > > > I don't think we should really try to support this. Restarting D-BUS > > should be viewed like trying to live-restart a new kernel. > > I think there are some people already doing this. (live-restart a new > kernel) I doubt they'll get anywhere. It's just a nearly insoluble problem. > > There's so > > many complicated issues in it, and it'll be a rarely-tested code path. > > Right now it's a bug that the Fedora D-BUS and NetworkManager RPM scripts > > restart after a package upgrade. > > > > You should just have to reboot, IMO. > > I hope this is a joke. > If not, then this sounds a lot like MS Windows. Not everything Windows does is bad. > And nowadays, to reboot a FC4 takes ages (far more than MS windows), so > let's try to decrease the number of reboots. Totally agreed! So let's spend time fixing that bug. People are already working on it. > It is enough that we need to reboot after a kernel upgrade, please don't > make us reboot after upgrading any other package x,y,z. No one is suggesting you be forced to reboot after upgrading immediately. But in order to get the upgrade functionality, yes, you will have to reboot. The way Windows XP security updates work is actually really nice; if you're not using the computer it just reboots it for you, otherwise it gives you a notification that you should reboot at some point soon. Hopefully we'll get notifications landed for GNOME 2.12 and we'll be able to do something similar.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part