1

Topic: And again about plantains...

2

Re: And again about plantains...

Hello, Sheridan, you wrote: S> All of you still continue to touch Windows for servers? Really such still remained? Windows for a long time already not an operating system, and the big dustbin propped up by crutches from different directions.

3

Re: And again about plantains...

Hello, Sheridan, you wrote: S> All of you still continue to touch Windows for servers? Really such still remained?  it is full. Simply from the MSEC the such corrected from time immemorial: not to put in  before appearance of the first ., 2008R2 - remarkable.... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>

4

Re: And again about plantains...

Hello, kov_serg, you wrote: _> Windows for a long time already not an operating system, and the big dustbin propped up by crutches from different directions. The Windows came to an end with release W8. It is possible to tell that official date  - October 26, 2012... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>

5

Re: And again about plantains...

Hello, Sheridan, you wrote: S> All of you still continue to touch Windows for servers? Really such still remained? To you here https://nponeccop.livejournal.com/603513.html https://nponeccop.livejournal.com/602359.html All on both systems absolutely equally, but is made differently. On  after a patch used  in storage it remains . Accordingly after a patch it is necessary to restart used service (and normal systems, instead of these your Archi, really speak, what exactly ). But  type libc, pid 1 and kernels it is impossible to restart some without reboot. Accordingly "poor" put updates but are not overloaded and from them nobody demands it, though it is necessary. As a result updates were not delivered (system is vulnerable as is still launched  the code) but people, think that were delivered. False feeling of safety and the superiority (however, to it to this feeling not to get used). Ridiculous enough situation in Arche happens, if a companion updated a kernel, but was not overloaded, and here someone interposes a device in usb, the unit for which has not been loaded. udev tries  the old unit, and shit hits the fan. The Same, basically, is watched, if any process loads.so through dlopen itself, using an old name. In problem Windows not in that that "the blocked files cannot be rewritten as on " (if them it was possible, it would not affect in any way reboot), and that system more , and almost all patches affect not restarted up components. They try , and also functions dynamic  "as in paid " for a long time , but help feeblly. Such rates I think leaves years 5, yet do not make neperepuskaemost-without-reboot at level .

6

Re: And again about plantains...

Hello, Glory, you wrote: All on both systems absolutely equally, but is made differently. So and in  not . But there there is a possibility a rake to shift on the.

7

Re: And again about plantains...

Hello, CreatorCray, you wrote: CC>, 2008R2 - remarkable. 2016 not less remarkable.  from the moment of an output.

8

Re: And again about plantains...

But  type libc, pid 1 and kernels it is impossible to restart some without reboot. [b] the kernel just can be restarted that without reboot. The special call for this purpose even is. Accordingly "poor" put updates but are not overloaded and from them nobody demands it, though it is necessary. All affected demons receive a signal on restarting the Case with libc there is an exception demanding reboot because with change libc upon all system is updated. Thus in normal  all updated packets have the following version number of OS. As a result updates were not delivered (system is vulnerable as is still launched  the code) but people, think that were delivered. With an update libc, , took place to be setting no more and not less new version of OS. And without reboot can the old version of OS continues to work. Ridiculous enough situation in Arche happens, if a companion updated a kernel, but was not overloaded, and here someone interposes a device in usb, the unit for which has not been loaded. udev tries  the old unit, and shit hits the fan. After kernel update there should be a restarting of all demons (normally it absolutely transparently for the user). In problem Windows not in that that "the blocked files cannot be rewritten as on " In  just  files it is possible to rename very easily and, then, to rewrite. And that system more  In that that the system is clumsy and thought less over + drags a heap  on the trailer. One only 64 bit System32 and 32-bit SysWoW64 delivers... Was at them 16-bit System and did not hinder, and here  (actually not  and to ). And so in all.

9

Re: And again about plantains...

Hello, eskimo82, you wrote: E> One only 64 bit System32 and 32-bit SysWoW64 delivers... Was at them 16-bit System and did not hinder, and here  (actually not  and to ). And so in all. And who ? Misters wooden writers of application programs.

10

Re: And again about plantains...

E>> One only 64 bit System32 and 32-bit SysWoW64 delivers... Was at them 16-bit System and did not hinder, and here  (actually not  and to ). And so in all. And who ? Misters wooden writers of application programs. Well so after all could leave System32 - for 32, and to make System64 - from 64 bits . And  applications perfectly would work. This trouble with SysWOW64 - it is simple that at  (which includes recompilation) it was not necessary to change  lines. On mine they here very strongly went too far in support . There are no problems search to find System32 and to change on System64, normally all the same crookedly written code should be adapted at passage on 64, to change autochangeover single line thus a trifle in comparison with castes void * in int and back, for example.

11

Re: And again about plantains...

> But  type libc, pid 1 and kernels it is impossible to restart some without reboot. [b] E> the kernel just can be restarted that without reboot. The special call for this purpose even is. Only this call as a matter of fact is . And for update of an operating kernel when very much it would be desirable without  - made special .

12

Re: And again about plantains...

Hello, ononim, you wrote: O> This trouble with SysWOW64 - it is simple that at  (which includes recompilation) it was not necessary to change  lines. Because application-oriented developers  and then roll the user of a butt on OS. It is a typical problem of support of reverse compatibility. O> on mine they here very strongly went too far in support . OS without programs is not necessary to anybody. If at the user that that on new OS is not got it means that it does not pass to new OS that is bad.... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>

13

Re: And again about plantains...

And who ? Misters wooden writers of application programs. Somewhere at them , differently would not get this crutch with ...

14

Re: And again about plantains...

CC> Because application-oriented developers  and then roll the user of a butt on OS. CC> it is a typical problem of support of reverse compatibility. In other OS application-oriented why that  to such level. , why? O>> On mine they here very strongly went too far in support . CC> OS without programs is not necessary to anybody. If at the user that that on new OS is not got it means that it does not pass to new OS that is bad. So old 32-bit  hinders nothing to work with System32 and in other OS do so (was lib added lib64 - an old part as was and remained it nobody touches). And in case of 32 bit SysWoW64 that that is explicit  the Hindu looks through...

15

Re: And again about plantains...

O> Only this call as a matter of fact is . Not absolutely. kexec is an update and "restarting" of interiors of a kernel.

16

Re: And again about plantains...

O>> Only this call as a matter of fact is . E> Not absolutely. kexec is an update and "restarting" of interiors of a kernel. Yes, and as a matter of fact it , simply passing BIOS.

17

Re: And again about plantains...

O>> This trouble with SysWOW64 - it is simple that at  (which includes recompilation) it was not necessary to change  lines. CC> because application-oriented developers  and then roll the user of a butt on OS. CC> it is a typical problem of support of reverse compatibility. It not that case. Once again, __ applications perfectly would work without all this kitchen with . This kitchen  only for simplification _ _, instead of for support of reverse compatibility with already assembled applications. But simplifying  (on slightly), it complicated all remaining.

18

Re: And again about plantains...

CC>> It is a typical problem of support of reverse compatibility. E> in other OS application-oriented why that  to such level. , why? The Underside of homogeneity of a platform (hussars to be silent).  a zoo big, all differ, therefore  a little, guided on , got used to rely on details of specific implementation less. The same  can appear in/lib,/usr/lib,/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu or still  where. And Windows - it one, and despite presence GetSystemDirectory all got used that it too most that %WINDIR %\System32, moreover, in 99 % of cases it C:\Windows\System32.

19

Re: And again about plantains...

Hello, eskimo82, you wrote: CC>> Because application-oriented developers  and then roll the user of a butt on OS. CC>> it is a typical problem of support of reverse compatibility. E> in other OS application-oriented why that  to such level. , why? In other systems () not reverse compatibility. Unless sometimes, at level "it , collect itself".

20

Re: And again about plantains...

P> In other systems () not reverse compatibility. Unless sometimes, at level "it , collect itself". It you about MacOSX so?

21

Re: And again about plantains...

O> Yes, and as a matter of fact it , simply passing BIOS. And also reboot of system and  (... In terms mobile: IPL1, IPL2...

22

Re: And again about plantains...

O>> Yes, and as a matter of fact it , simply passing BIOS. E> And also reboot of system and  (... In terms mobile: IPL1, IPL2... I do not know your mobile terms, but reboot of system it not , and causes. And  only BIOS POST (well and bootloader) which on the big servers occupies minute, in difference from several seconds on  therefore such decision there makes sense. And  - all is overloaded.

23

Re: And again about plantains...

Hello, Sheridan, you wrote: S> All of you still continue to touch Windows for servers? Really such still remained? Well objectively  it is most simple variant to lift the server for the typical advanced user . Linux it strongly another, and server  almost same, as well as . The advanced users  a large quantity, from here and  servers full. I here in Kazakhstan work often with state organs and  servers yet did not see any. The most popular server it windows 2003.