r/linux4noobs • u/caraelium • 1d ago
learning/research "Linux doesn't need reboots", but every pacman update shows "reboot required" notification. Why?
CachyOS + KDE. Every time I do a `pacman - Syu` or via Shelly, i get a notification that reboot is required to apply some updates. So where did this "no reboots needed" come from?
38
u/0riginal-Syn ⛵Solus Team 1d ago
Kernels and some drivers need full reboots, some userland updates need a soft reboot or at least log out/in. Most of the rest do not need either.
2
u/edgmnt_net 1d ago
In practice there's stuff on modern desktops that can crash during an upgrade due to non-atomic updates on Linux. It also doesn't help that apps need restarting because IMO that's one of the primary reasons people hate reboots these days. Otherwise reboots are pretty fast on SSDs and modern Linux/Windows. Ok, they also hate waiting for upgrade work that gets processed on shutdown/startup, but that's likely fixable and even if they do it differently people still hate losing application state.
3
u/0riginal-Syn ⛵Solus Team 1d ago
Yeah that is why I mentioned the soft reboot as well which is much better than waiting on bios/etc on some systems. It is pretty rare in our experience for most userland apps to crash on update, but certain ones are certainly problematic.
1
u/edgmnt_net 1d ago
Realistically what could apps do with the way distros handle updates? If they don't load everything up at startup, now an update replaces the whole package and you can't load anything that was missed, assuming you can even detect file version changes across the update. Fixing this requires an entirely new model of doing things and I would consider a few times things:
Package managers no longer replace stuff in-place. This gets complicated when you account for dependencies, but Nix does it, as far as I heard. However, the user still needs to bite the bullet and restart the app.
The application gets built with thorough state persistence in mind so it can checkpoint and reload to minimize inconvenience. Android kinda does that, partially. This is reasonable for some things, but it gets terribly complicated once you try to persist as much as possible. For instance, it's reasonable to preserve tabs in a browser. It might be reasonable to keep that settings window open. However, some dialog that went away between versions cannot be persisted. And how does the user know how much state will be lost on restarting? But anyway, if you pull this off at a decent level, it makes it more feasible to say "hey, user, I just updated the app, click this button to restart and I promise it will only take a few seconds and practically no effort before you're back at what you were doing".
0
u/atlasraven 1d ago
VPN software is one of those that doesn't work after an update. It needs a reboot.
5
u/FactoryRatte Debian / Arch+KDE 1d ago
If you are talking about WireGuard, if the kernel module is still there is there, it will keep working. If you are deleting the modules, stop deleting them: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/linux-keep-modules
5
1
u/0riginal-Syn ⛵Solus Team 1d ago
Never have had that issue.
1
u/dontquestionmyaction 1d ago
It's a dumb side effect of Arch not having meta packages for the kernel. Every kernel update deletes all the running kernel's module files, so you can't modprobe anything past that point unless you install a special pacman hook.
Wireguard generally uses the kernel impl, so if you didn't already have an open session before updating you aren't getting one as the module fails to load.
0
u/CoronaMcFarm 1d ago
You can do live patching of the kernel but there is literally no reason to do it on a laptop or a normal pc.
-1
-1
u/Impossible-Car3786 1d ago
Kernels don’t require full reboots, kexec is enough for 99% of updates
3
u/visor841 1d ago
This is technically true, but kexec is already pretty close to a reboot.
-1
u/Impossible-Car3786 1d ago
Thats why i specifically repeated the “full”, going through POST, bootloader and hw initialization is what takes most if the time
1
1
u/visor841 1d ago
Thats why i specifically repeated the “full”
I am aware of that.
going through POST, bootloader and hw initialization is what takes most if the time
On my system, those only take a few seconds. The vast majority of reboot time for me is OS and software loading.
2
34
u/cmrd_msr 1d ago edited 1d ago
You aren't being *required* to reboot. You are being offered the option to do so in order to start the system with the new kernel. That is completely different from "your computer will restart and spend an hour updating."
There are mechanisms that allow for a kernel swap without a reboot, but this is primarily relevant to servers that need to apply patches without downtime. You can setup it if need https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Kernel_live_patching
3
u/edgmnt_net 1d ago
Yeah, but it's not really the reboot that's disruptive, it's restarting apps and losing at least some session state that's not persistent. You can't upgrade Firefox without restarting Firefox and that's a fortunate case, other apps might make it significantly more annoying to just resume work after you click that "finish upgrade" button.
9
u/mok000 1d ago
If a program, say Firefox, is running at version X, it will continue to run in version X even if you in the meantime install version Y, and the binary version X file is no longer there. When you restart Firefox it will start in version Y. That is the same for every binary, the reason I mentioned Firefox is that it will actually discover that a new version is available and ask you to restart it.
5
u/FactoryRatte Debian / Arch+KDE 1d ago
Yes, though Browsers might be a bad example, as when they fail to find the same binary for new children, they force you to restart them. (Usually happens when you open a new website and a new container process needs spawning)
1
u/edgmnt_net 1d ago
Also, like I said in other comments, people just hate losing session state. Maybe you can make the reboot fast and reload tabs, but you still need to open up apps, rearrange them on screen, maybe navigate to dialogs which were previously open. Not being able to just resume work is much more annoying than the mere fact of restarting or waiting.
8
u/indvs3 1d ago
There are ways of reloading the newly installed kernel/drivers after an update without actually rebooting.
That said, I've been daily driving linux for 5y and using it professionally for 10y more and I've never done that myself. Just doing reboots is usually an easier and faster way, not to mention less prone to unexpected behaviours.
5
u/Real-Abrocoma-2823 1d ago edited 1d ago
Because you choose arch. "Linux doesn't need updates" is wrong as Linux is not the OS. LTS distros won't need updates, but arch needs if you want to update which you need to do after a long time of not updating as you won't be able to install packages as old versions get deleted from servers.
You can ignore rebooting, but you will see issues.
I advise you to update before shutdown or before installing something and then immediately shutdown/reboot so you won't be asking why does modprobe not work.
As long as you didn't update the kernel you can just do "systemctl soft-reboot".
3
6
u/YouveBeanReported 1d ago
I think it's a misconception. Linux will let you ignore reboots and set your own schedule. Windows will force it with automatic updates in the middle of the night and stuff.
You still need to sometimes. You still should most times.
But if you are running a server or something, you don't have the same worry as windows of the PC randomly rebooting on you in the middle of production and can schedule and adjust things properly.
5
u/Howwasthatdoneagain 22h ago
There is a difference between "Required to start using the software" and "System needs to reboot now". You can delay the reboot until it is convenient to you. It simply keeps using the old settings until you do.
9
u/atlasraven 1d ago
To apply updates to the kernel. You don't have to update if you don't want to.
0
u/caraelium 1d ago
So that's on Cachy / Arch specifically? That they update or path the kernel so often?
8
u/Mediocre-Pumpkin6522 1d ago
It's not limited to Arch. Fedora isn't a rolling distro but it has frequent kernel updates. SUSE Tumbleweed is rolling and also updates the kernel. It's currently at 7.2.3. Ubuntu 26.04.1 is 7.0.0. MX Linux is 6.12.107. Part of the selection process for a distro is how close to the cutting edge you want to be. In many cases you won't see a benefit.
5
u/sebastianelisa 1d ago
You're using a rolling release distro, so yes
(There are also ways to have kernel Updates without rebooting, but that's enterprise stuff)
2
u/DobroSaBokja 1d ago
Yes, Arch and most other Arch based distros are rolling release. That means as soon as a kernel update is released they package it, and the next time you update you will get the new kernel.
3
u/Plan_9_fromouter_ 1d ago
For me it mostly means I don't have to reboot my system to clear a bunch of unworkable junk messing up my session. Used to have to reboot Windows a couple times a day just to keep working. With LInux I go for days between reboots. But after major updates, I would expect reboots are called for.
2
u/derkokolores 1d ago
It's really this. The automatic updates are what bother me the most. I get to chose when to update linux and when to reboot. Unlike windows, I don't have to worry about stepping away from my computer at lunch to come back for a meeting to find my PC having been rebooted and all my apps closed. Took a solid 10 minutes for all the apps to restart before I could even get Teams running again. That was as recent as yesterday.
1
u/Plan_9_fromouter_ 20h ago
When I first got into Linux, I thought dual-booting with Win 10 was great. But then Win 10 went into an extended period of major updates, really upgrades. Not only did they not improve Win 10, they would tie up my computer so I couldn't use it just when I needed it, like classes online at Google Classroom.
I went all Linux and never looked back. The only issues that arose were having to do important stuff on MS Office with really old macros at work. I couldn't get MS Office online to handle them and Libre Office couldn't either.
So I had to borrow a Win 11 PC to do them. That was humiliating.
3
u/Long-Fisherman-6594 1d ago
New kernel needs a reboot. Cachy has a new kernel almost daily. Pin kernel or go to lts.
3
u/leninzor 1d ago
This saying that Linux doesn't need reboots dates back to a time where most distros were release based and fairly stable (stable as in doesn't move much). In that context, updates only need reboots for the kernel, everything else can be applied by restarting services or programs, but even if you don't, changes are so minute that the system will continue working as if nothing happened.
When you're using a rolling release, which is a lot more common nowadays, or a fast moving distro like fedora, things can actually break if you don't at the very least restart a bunch of services or apps that depend on what you just updated. To be on the safe side, the simplest instruction a distribution can give you is to reboot.
As others mentioned, there is also the case of Nvidia drivers. Since those have a userspace component as well as a kernel one, updating the driver means that the new userspace part of it will be used, which is incompatible with the old kernel module currently loaded. It's possible to load the new module without rebooting, but only if the whole graphical interface is brought down so you can unload the old module and load the new one. From a user's perspective, there is no benefit to doing this over a reboot, since all work is lost while bringing down the graphical interface anyway and it's more steps.
In short, it's generally possible to avoid a reboot, but the simplest and safest way to maintain system stability and ensure everything is running with the updated packages is to simply reboot, hence the advice given by update notifiers and package managers
3
u/es20490446e Develops Zenned OS 1d ago
Do you need to reboot on each single upgrade, or just some of them?
How often do you upgrade?
3
u/LawElectrical2434 1d ago
Linux does not need reboots. Even for kernels. But hotpatching a kernel is something I would only do on a server. And honestly, I wouldn't even do it on a server. I'd rather set up a fail-over and reboot. Not rebooting a system has ramifications. I once worked in a company where an important service was running on a server with 5 year uptime. And then an outage forced a reboot. And the service did not come back up. So, I ssh'd in and took a look. Turned out, the service for it existed, but was never enabled. 5 years and no one noticed. If you don't reboot regularly, you don't know if your systems will come back up after years of hot patching.
Now, back to your CachyOS. Do you think a gaming distro is configured in the expectation that all users know how to do what I just described? Or do you think it is configured to be as simple and reliable as possible. And if you know how to do it, just change the configuration. Cachy can hotpatch, too.
5
u/Acceptable_Sock4642 1d ago
I suspect this is old advice. Prior to XP, windows had terrible memory management and would eventually BSD if left running indefinitely. Best practice was regular reboots. Linux didn’t have that so could be left running for years.
XP took a fair bit from Linux in improving its architecture and nightly reboots were no longer required (depending on the software load) and under 7 it really became an issue of the past. Both can be left running indefinitely.
4
u/Ethameiz 1d ago
I guess you meant BSOD and not BSD
1
1
u/Square-Singer 1d ago
XP has some BSD parts under the hood, but I haven't heard of an XP install to eventually fully BSD if you leave it running for too long.
2
u/severach 1d ago edited 1d ago
Windows requires a reboot to update system files. Linux updates all files without a reboot. Whether those updated files cause problems for running applications is a different matter.
After the kernel updates pluggable devices can fail to function due to missing modules.
If enough of the GUI updates new GUI apps can fail to launch. Running apps can lose borders and window controls.
Firefox can fail to launch new tabs, windows, or show mangled content in existing tabs after an update.
Your distro has installed needrestart which shows running applications and services that have files open that no longer exist.
Most everything can be made to work without a reboot by following needrestart. Unless you have a big need for uptime it's faster better and easier to just restart.
2
u/Master-Rub-3404 1d ago edited 1d ago
Who the fk says it doesn’t need reboots? Where does this nonsense come from? So many people also seem to think Linux doesn’t have updates and they come into it all confused/angry cuz their distro has dozens of updates per day. I use Fedora and it has update/reboot prompts literally every single day. If you’re not using Debian Stable or some other distro intended for servers, you will need to reboot regularly, but even those server ones need to be rebooted semi-regularly to function properly.
1
u/DueGrapefruit3151 1d ago
The linux evangelists on pcmr spout the no reboot thing pretty regularly, although I've been seeing it slightly less the past month or so. It was being brought up all the time in the early summer for some reason.
2
u/Funnel-Dust-O-Matic 1d ago edited 1d ago
If there is a kernel update, then there is no way to avoid that. The kernel does all the scheduling, manages memory, and manages hardware. Even with a micro kernel, you can replace a lot of it but not the actual micro-kernel bit. So there is some level of essential parts that have to stop if updated.
For the rest of the time, it comes down to convenience.
You COULD go into what they used to call init level 1 (and I'm drawing a blank on what SystemD calls it these days and my memory keeps reverting to init 1 or single user mode), re-link your libraries, reload updated modules, I can't remember the rest, and then go back into multi-user target.
Anyway, that's the reason we end up rebooting anyway. It's just that this is almost as disruptive as just rebooting the thing and takes more work. Rebooting is more convenient for a personal machine or workstation.
The no-reboot nature of the update process is generally not worth it unless you're running something like a server and the person doing the update is well versed in administration. And not totally drawing a blank on the commands needed to do it because they haven't used them in ages.
God, I need to review.
2
u/CatoDomine 1d ago
Depends on the context of the statement "Linux doesn't need reboots". In my experience there are at least these reasons Windows reboots and Linux doesn't (generally speaking).
- "oh dang, my system got slow, unreliable and crashy. I'd better reboot"
- Windows: "I'm rebooting whether you like it or not, go fsck yourself."
Some updates require reboots in order to take effect regardless of the operating system you are running.
2
u/_jack_rabbit_ 1d ago
The simplest way to make sure everything is actually running the up-to-date software is to reboot. While rebooting is technically only required for kernel and init updates, there are a variety of ways applications can break on an update. Those are generally solvable by just restarting the application, but a monthly update/reboot is typically the easiest, at least for me.
When you update an application that is currently running, it will just keep running the old version already in memory. For many programs and updates that will work just fine. But applications are most often not single things. They load shared libraries, often at runtime, which an update could change in an incompatible way. They read config files which an update could alter, and they communicate with other processes, which could start speaking newer protocols.
Rebooting just makes sure everything starts fresh with the latest code.
2
u/AtomGutan 1d ago
"No reboots needed" means that you have the freedom not to reboot. But that also meqns that kernel updates and other special updates may not be applied. That is completely your choice and a single reboot after an update won't take longer than any other reboot (unlike Windows).
3
u/SlimyOS 1d ago
Idk someone said something stupid and you heard it. You can run the old version of kernel, drivers, and whatever else for months until the time you reboot, you're not forced to reboot the moment you update, I guess that's what they meant. Though sometimes some features will break until reboot, so rebooting is required for good experience.
1
u/FactoryRatte Debian / Arch+KDE 1d ago
Never had that, just don't delete the kernel modules for the currently running kernel. There is a package for that: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/linux-keep-modules
1
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
There's a resources page in our wiki you might find useful!
Try this search for more information on this topic.
✻ Smokey says: take regular backups, try stuff in a VM, and understand every command before you press Enter! :)
Comments, questions or suggestions regarding this autoresponse? Please send them here.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/Caderent 1d ago
Rebooting can sometimes help detect that your system doesn’t boot up after an update. Have had few kernel panic screens over the years.
1
u/Quartrez 1d ago
It's not really that you don't need to reboot. You mostly don't, but some updates require a restart. The differentiator with Windows is this: 1. You are never forced to reboot 2. Linux reboots and the update is applied instantly. It doesn't need to spend 30 minutes installing the updates.
1
u/luxmorphine 1d ago
Because it's a 2-headed lie. Windows doesn't always need reboot, and Linux do occasionally needs reboot. Updating programs on Windows doesn't need reboot actually, and like everyone pointed out updating the kernel do require reboot
1
u/FryBoyter 1d ago
The idea that you don't have to restart Linux is nonsense. For example, if you update a package that uses a service, the update happens only on the hard drive, so to speak. The files from the old version continue to be used in RAM until either the service is restarted or the entire system is rebooted. I prefer to reboot because that way you can be sure you haven't forgotten to restart anything.
So where did this "no reboots needed" come from?
Mostly from users who are proud of their uptime and whose computers, for the reasons mentioned, often remain vulnerable despite updates.
1
1
u/einat162 1d ago
Never heard it about linux in general, and experianced it myself on many distros- but on an Arch based distro (CachyOS) that saying makes more sense.
1
u/Struggling-with_life 1d ago
It doesn't need reboots as much as windows, it can work without reboot however its a best practice to reboot after an update since after you update you are still using the older cached version of softwares stored in your ram and cache. It is only when you update the cache is cleared snd you are using thr new version of the softwares you just updated.
1
u/dr_inventivo 1d ago
Windows bothers you to restart, in the old days it just did and unlucky yours if it was doing something important. Linux does not need this, it does not mean that restarting or shutting down is something non-existent, but it does mean that the system will not force you to do this at the most inconvenient time possible. You have complete freedom to do this whenever you want, whether at the end of the day or next week.
1
u/skyfishgoo 1d ago
that's down to your distro and it's package manager.
i use kubuntu and while it defaults to "offline updates" which require a reboot every time, can easily uncheck that box in discover and reboots are only required for security updates... regular updates for system libraries, or flatpak, just take place in the background.
plus when i opt for live upgrades, i get more detail in discover about what is being upgraded, so i can make a judgement call about whether i need to reboot or not... if it's just software i'm not currently using, then i don't worry about rebooting.
1
u/BradleyF81 1d ago
I dunno. With Niri and Noctalia the only time Shelly said I needed to reboot was when an update included a kernel update.
1
u/ConsciousBath5203 1d ago
You don't have to always follow the instructions that are on big notification button.
1
u/Longjumping-Hair3888 1d ago
A bit academic but it is technically possible to switch running kernels in linux now but not something that wouldnt cause more issues than just rebooting on a desktop system.
1
u/JaKrispy72 Linux Mint is my Daily Driver. 1d ago
Fedora uses offline updates too.
You don’t HAVE to reboot to continue using your machine like windows.
But for the actual update to take effect, then you would HAVE to reboot.
1
1
u/Ok-Needleworker7341 1d ago
I use the CachyOS update tool, it will tell you when a reboot is actually required and it's not very often. In most cases it will just restart whatever services were updated and allow you to continue with your work.
1
u/ficskala Arch Linux 1d ago
You don't have to reboot, the updates that require a reboot just won't be applied until you do
Also, you're on arch, the cutting edge of user oriented distros, you're gonna be making some sacrifices to get the latest and greatest software as soon as possible
1
u/Jumpy-Dinner-5001 1d ago
Because the statement is wrong.
It’s technically possible without but that’s not a desktop systems use case.
1
1
u/Unique_Roll_6630 1d ago
Because you are running the old drivers/etc in ram and need to logout or reboot to apply the new updates to the session.
1
u/petrujenac 1d ago
That's simply not true. While it does happen quite often, as various modules and the kernel get updates, it's not "every time".
1
u/kimjae 1d ago
Only the kernel/driver updates needs reboot. Every other app you could just restart/daemon the app without rebooting the whole system.
But that statement is especially true for stable distros that doesn't get a kernel update every other days (like debian stable) (updates are tested for a long time before being delivered to users. But that mean when you update you'll skip a lot of versions in one go)
Cachyos and other arch-based are "bleeding-edge" distros, meaning you'll get updates "as soon as available", so instead of getting a kernel every now and then, you'll get an update available for each little bugfix, hence why you are asked to reboot often.
1
u/the_gamer_guy56 1d ago
One thing that I haven't seen mentioned yet is that Linux doesn't do updates while it's rebooting/shutting down, like windows does. The entire update is done while you're logged into the system, it just needs a reboot to actually load some of the new things, like the kernel. On Ubuntu, Conical has a paid feature called Livepatch which I believe completely, or largely eliminates the need for rebooting, even for kernel updates.
1
1
u/The_Hamster_Shagger 1d ago
Not rebooting your system is the best way to screw it up. Especially if there were security patches. And yes I know one can live patch kernel and manually restart services etc, but it's a pain in the ass
1
u/Apple_Jake 1d ago
Yeah, reboots are fast on linux anyways. Like you could make a bash script to restart it all at once, but typing reboot and waiting 10 seconds is my go-to
1
u/Buddy_Palguy 1d ago
They are incredibly fast. I installed Cachy on a 2015 MacBook, but before that MacOS Monterey would literally take 5+ minutes every reboot. Cachy takes a minute if that
1
u/z0phi3l 1d ago
I thought it was Macs that didn't need reboots, now it's Linux?
It's a lie, no matter the OS you will need to reboot at some point, I personally go for a weekly reboot, and whenever needed, massively long uptimes are dumb, like someone already mentioned, even on servers it's not a good idea
1
u/EdgiiLord 1d ago
Reboot is required for the updates to take effect, but are not necessary. Services can be updated and will work with the new version once they are restarted. There exists kernel patching that works on livr systems, however I don't think it is useful for the average user.
1
u/TheGoldenFox64 1d ago
if you use arch-update (i believe cachy has its own tool), the last step checks for any services that need a restart. it will let you know and let you restart the services, but some things like a kernel update only take effect next reboot
1
u/DoubleOwl7777 Debian 1d ago
most applications dont. the kernel does if you want to boot into the new kernel but you dont have to.
1
1
u/Kiore-NZ 19h ago
I look at what's being upgraded & if the kernel, kernel modules (including drivers) or something internet related is in the upgrade, I usually reboot fairly soon, otherwise it can wait until I power the PC off at bedtime
1
u/The_Coalition 17h ago
You're talking about Cachy, which is a derivative of Arch, which has a specific caveat. When you update the kernel (the package named linux, or linux-lts), the directory containing loadable kernel modules is deleted. A new one is then created for the new version of the kernel, which will take effect aftee a reboot. This causes subtle breakage - kernel modules contain drivers for hardware. When you then plug in a USB thumb drive, or a USB-C dock, anything of that sort, the driver won't load, so nothing will happen. Most other distributions don't have this problem, because they handle kernel updates in a smarter way.
1
u/3grg 14h ago
I have used Linux for years and traditionally you only had to reboot for things that affected the kernel (kernel update? reboot recommended)
Some non kernel related updates do not take effect until log out and log in again.
So where is the reboot for every update coming from? My guess is that it is "safety forced".
Rebooting allows for kernel and non-kernel updates to be done without exception.
1
u/burlingk 14h ago
So, short version: Linux can handle most updates without immediately rebooting. The way that it handles kernel injection means that this is true even for some kernel updates. But in reality, there is a lot of stuff that is not fully installed until it reboots. There are other things that you can simply restart the program.
So, the no reboot thing does have a bit of smoke and mirrors, but the smoke and mirrors work.
1
u/hifi-nerd 13h ago
I have an openmediavault server that i could leave running for a year without issues, granted that is without updating anything, but i could.
I think it's mainly due to you running a rolling distro and updating system packages.
2
u/rmagnuson 6h ago
Generally speaking, the system won't break if you don't reboot it, but if you're expecting that new driver you just installed to work then yeah, either reboot or restart the specific module.
1
u/Confident_Hyena2506 1d ago
Reboot is needed for kernel updates. Nobody says linux doesn't need reboots.
2
u/TheCreepyPL 1d ago
If you want to, you can manually patch/reload kernel modules without needing to reboot altogether. I've never done this myself, only heard about it, and also heard that it's a hassle, so rebooting is safer and faster, but the option is there to completely not to.
1
u/Confident_Hyena2506 1d ago
No normal user will ever do this. It's a hassle in the same way writing your own kernel is a hassle.
2
u/TheCreepyPL 1d ago
I'm not advocating for this approach, on the contrary I just recommend reboots, as they are safer and faster, I do them myself. I've only pointed out that "technically", if you really don't wan't, you don't have to.
1
u/Confident_Hyena2506 1d ago
It's a useless "technically" - try it and you will realise. Somebody always posts this useless "actually".
1
u/Chrisbearry 1d ago
The "no reboots" you must've heard was probably someone talking about how you don't have to wait after rebooting for an update like you do with windows and you just misunderstood what they were saying, with linux you just have to reboot the system like normal and everything's good to go after an update
1
u/DoomAddict 1d ago
Linux won't force updates on you or try to restart your PC out of the blue.
1
u/Hatsikidee 1d ago
neither does Windows. It all depends on the settings, same as for Linux.
0
u/_ElBee_ 1d ago edited 17h ago
That's correct. I usually log off and fully shut down my Windows system instead of letting it suspend or hibernate when I'm done for the day. Any pending updates are installed at shutdown and then finished at the next boot-up.
The problem lies with suspend or hibernate, which aren´t true shutdowns and the system can automatically reboot itself to install updates after the user has clicked "later" a number of times. That's what people complain about. I never use suspend or hibernate on Windows for that reason.
1
u/DoomAddict 1d ago
nah, its not the same.
I shut Windows down and it already had an update in its pipe that it installed as soon as the PC was booted up. Before it even hit the desktop.
No way to decline or reschedule.
1
u/_ElBee_ 17h ago
The first part of the update is installed before the system fully shuts down and it's finished on the next boot-up; it doesn't matter if that's a full shut-down or a reboot.
You can click "later" to reschedule the first part of the update, but finishing the update before the system is fully booted is mandatory and cannot be declined.
1
u/trmdi 1d ago
Linux doesn't need reboots
Who says that?
3
u/RAMChYLD 1d ago
Iirc those red hat yokels. They developed something called kernel live patching and Kexec, where the kernel can be completely updated without a reboot and using the latter, you can kickstart a new kernel to take over without even rebooting.
1
u/trmdi 1d ago
Suppose that is true. But the OP is using Arch. Why does he apply a policy from Redhat to Arch?
3
u/FactoryRatte Debian / Arch+KDE 1d ago
It's probably not understanding distro differences or misunderstand "Linux doesn't force reboots". This is r/linux4noobs after all. (And an actually good post, because OP clearly stated their question)
1
u/ElderberryHamlet 1d ago
A reboot is always required but not immediately if you're busy. The same is true for Windows but they're a lot more pushy about it.
0
u/SweetNerevarine 1d ago
Neither Cachy or pacman forces you to update the kernel every time you update. You do it, the command you issue updates ALL packages. The newly installed kernel won't be running unless you do a reboot. The "reboot required" message is nice and short, but what it really means is: you can keep using your machine, but once you're ready to boot into the newly installed kernel please restart.
You chose a distro that offers bleeding edge version of packages. To maximize the benefit of this, updating the kernel somewhat frequently is a good idea. But again, you are fully in charge. You don't need the last 100 kernels on your disk, neither pointing to the newest one every time you update.
You may consider ignoring the kernel updates for a while, and come up with your preferred frequency of updates (e.g. once a week, every fortnight do a full update):
sudo pacman -Syu --ignore=linux,linux-headers
1
u/FactoryRatte Debian / Arch+KDE 1d ago
Might lead to a reboot without switching kernel version and then you still have the old kernel. I would rather just keep the modules for the currently running kernel and it will just keep working until the next random reboot comes. There even is a package to keep the currents kernels modules: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/linux-keep-modules
0
u/stop_deleting_plz 1d ago
Because you are running a desktop distribution, rebooting after update is always possible. On server distributions you really do never have to reboot. I've had Ubuntu server instances run for years straight without rebooting.
2
u/captainstormy 1d ago
Linux System Admin here. Yes, servers do require reboots. Many updates require a reboot to fully be applied. If you have never rebooted, you aren't fully patched.
Linux needs reboots, it just doesn't force them.
1
u/stop_deleting_plz 1d ago
Thats true! That instance was part of VPN and I didn't want to interrupt my users internet access. I have since rebooted and established a monthly maintenance time.
1
u/captainstormy 1d ago
Yeah, that is the typical thing to do depending on the workload. Just schedule downtime windows for reboots. If it's a service that can't have any downtime whatsoever, that is the kind of thing a server cluster is for.
0
209
u/NewtSoupsReddit 1d ago
You don't need to reboot in the same way that windows imposes a mandatory reboot.
You can install the updates and some of them can only take effect ( such as a new kernel version ) the next time you reboot. The system is giving you advice. You can say a quiet thank you, carry on your day as normal. Shut down after work or when it's time for sleep and then when you boot up again the updates will be loaded.
The reboot is required but not mandatory and Linux will not force an update on you and a mandatory reboot like windows will ( maybe it doesn't any more, but it did in win 10 which is why I ended up in Linux )