|
Well ... let's not be sexist here, it's cold outside this time of year: Sandra & Woo - Armour[^]
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
It's not about sexism - it's about chafing.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: I'm sure the free membership they keep offering
Thank God for that - I was envisioning you getting a job offer!
If you can't laugh at yourself - ask me and I will do it for you.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you mean I'd just like to thank ? or am I reading it wrong ?
"I didn't mention the bats - he'd see them soon enough" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
So I have an a$$ton of work going on. Multiple VMs zooming along, editors all over, yada yada.
Converted a project from ancient VS to VS2019. I was prompted to update VS2019. Now I have this Installer prompt that says:
"Success! One more step to go. Please restart your computer..."
Why? Seriously, why do I need to reboot? It's just a holdover from the "reboot Windows" it might fix it history. Or is VS really doing things to the OS that requires me to reboot? I'm not being sarcastic here. Help me understand.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know for sure but I suspect that it is genuinely very likely indeed that it has updated an OS component that (ideally) needs a restart.
The problem, to my mind, is that so many OS updates still need a restart. I seem to remember that this was supposed to have been solved back in the Vista or was it 7 timeframe. And yet, no, OS restarts after updates seem to me to be as common as ever.
Windows now has epic amounts of virtualisation built in, so can't this technology be used to help avoid the need for restarts due to OS component upgrades? Apparently not, so far.
Instead of new icons (sarcasm aside), architectural updates to avoid the need for restarts at seemingly every Windows Update session would be a major step on the right direction.
|
|
|
|
|
When I start an OS update, I think it's reasonable that I might have to reboot. It's the OS.
Visual Studio is an application. It has no business needing to reboot. Or maybe MS developers suck (sarcasm). Still wondering why.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: Visual Studio is an application. It has no business needing to reboot.
It does if you're using C++ or other shared components or runtimes that are in use by other applications. Those files cannot be replaced until they are released by the other applications using them. At the time of installation, the files are locked, so during the run of the installer, they are queued up to be replaced on the next O/S start since that's the only time the O/S can guarantee they will not be in use by other applications.
|
|
|
|
|
You saved me the time of typing that exact same response, so thank you. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: or other shared components or runtimes that are in use by other applications. Those files cannot be replaced until they are released by the other applications using them.
The only question I have is: Have they ever looked into UNIX/Linux/Minix code (it is open source)? Not that I state that *nix OSes are better in all possible ways, but still there is room for learning...
"The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary." Vidal Sassoon, 1928 - 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: Have they ever looked into ... there is room for learning...
BWAHAHAHAA! "Learning" and "Microsoft" in the same sentence! You must be new here.
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't used Unix derivatives for a few years (except MacOS and WSL), but I remember they needed to reboot as often as Windows if you install or update stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
It is true that to use specific updated features (like new kernel) you need a reboot, but you can do it whenever you want to - two weeks from now if you are in the middle.
But app updates - for instance your browser - are totally different. You can keep you running application, which will use the old libraries as long as it runs, but a new instance will load the new libraries with the new features... And you need no reboot of the system for that...
And it was like this from the very beginning of UNIX...
"The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary." Vidal Sassoon, 1928 - 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Hm, the only time I had to reboot my Linux box is when I updated to a new kernel or did a whole system update (version 1 to version 2 type update). Everything else just seems to update without requiring a restart. Over all, Linux has caused me had way fewer issues that Windows 10 has.
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly. I haven't restarted my Centos server for ages. And I have installed and uninstalled tonnes of things. A software should just use it's own codes, contained in it's own folder. If several softwares shared same DLLs, and the latest/newest DLL downloaded by the new software is incompatible (in some minor things) to the the oldest software sharing the same DLL, won't this break the old software?
Bad code management by M$.
They might have done this to save disk space, but, as far as I know, these redistributables have very small size.
|
|
|
|
|
This was the beauty of the OpenVMS versioning file system. A new image could be laid down - it'd get a new version number. All the older images would still be available to those programs that were using them. When those programs restarted they'd get the new image.
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: Visual Studio is an application. It has no business needing to reboot.
I agree. But it's a matter of "should" versus "does".
Things need to change.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, yeah. I get it. Wondering why Windows needs to reboot if I fart in it's general direction is an exercise in futility.
I get the technical comments. I just think back to that time when Bill was demonstrating USB device discovery and his machine blue screened...
It shows that if you put enough lipstick on a pig, you still have bacon eventually.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
FTFY: charlieg wrote: if you put enough lipstick on a pig, you still have [^] bacon eventually.
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
Windows locks executables (including DLLs) while they are in use. Because of this, in order to update shared components, the locks must be freed. While it's possible, there's no "clean" way to even determine who holds a lock that I know of (unless it was added to a more recent windows in which case I am wrong) so the safest thing to do is reboot.
VS uses a lot of shared components.
A lot of windows applications do, and generally, the larger/more complicated the application, the bigger your odds of having to reboot on update, because they typically use a lot of shared components increasing the odds that one of them is locked and the app needs to update it.
This also applies to the various OS features and shell widgets and doodads, not just applications.
I hope that clears it up.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Didn't you just thank dave for saving you to type the same answer?   
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed!
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
VS (which is an additional app, which we specifically download and install) shouldn't have shared components with OS / other applications. I can understand if it's OS bundled application...
|
|
|
|
|
The last time I looked into it, it was because Visual Studio likes to run background services - you know, those notifiers that let you know "there's an update waiting".
I got stuck in a loop once where the service actually got stuck, and was preventing the rest of an update from running and I got into a reboot-find-directory-delete-race, to try to erase the service before it auto-started. Took a couple of tries as I recall...
|
|
|
|
|
Could have included an update to a .Net framework that requires a restart?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
