System Restore

[Ante Karamatic]

On Mon, 2005-06-27 at 23:34 -0700, Shawn Christopher wrote:

> You have to excuse me...I'm not familiar with everyone one this list, 
> however....You are who to make this desicsion? (sp?)

I didn't make any desicsion. In OpenSource world you can't make
desicsion will there be something or not. This is just real conclusion.
Creating System Restore is just useless. There is no need for it. /etc
isn't the place where every user can write something. Windows registry
IS that place. So, you have non-admin users writing to registry.
Registry is binary file and can be easily coruppted, so it needs some
point of return.

If you used System Restore on Windows, you would know it's useless even
there.

There are some inovations in Windows that are good, and thoose
inovations will be implemented in Linux's window managers (window
managers, NOT Linux). It's very important to understand that Linux, as
kernel, sysv init and libc can't have system restore. It's pointless. It
would be step back, because now you can have multiple kernels and
multiple inits. If you loose libc, even system restore will not work,
cause it needs C library.

People who think that linking whole /etc to something else don't have
too much exp. in Linux or UNIX operating systems.

-- 
Ante Karamatic <ivoks at grad.hr>