You can get around the updates by shutting down from CLI on Windows.
Powers on
Immediately starts shut down
Refuses to close because the following programs are still running
The list is empty
it’s now safe to turn off your computer
It was never safe to turn it on in the first place
Lol, never happened to me in almost a decade of using systemd. Windows update was a constant blocker.
“shutdown” is a noun. I was on vacation because the company was in shutdown.
“shut down” is the compound verb you wanted.
Grammar checking a wojack meme?
Username checks out.
Username checks out.
must… not… bite…
I would argue executables can be verbified.
I can
grepa file. Why can’t ishutdown?Because grep isn’t a word? And since when do machines set the tone for human activity? Lights turn on, do you turn on in the morning?
🥴 I would 4 u bb
This boils down to a Linux using a file system which allows files to be deleted or replaced in the inode table while something has the old file open. So it’s easier (although not simple) to replace packages while other stuff is running. Whereas Windows has to shut everything else down so nothing has the file open to replace it and also fix stragglers during the next reboot.
its more to do with the fact that until recently linux distros did not have a desktop pc centered idea on how to do updates. but distros started to support offline updates, so you can install updates in a safer way, while the system is not running.
a major difference is that linux offline updates allows you to just shut down, without taking time with updates.
My phone and Linux PC’s now all do this. Primary partition in use. Updates apply to secondary partition. At next reboot, load the updated partition.
It’s so much better that the alternative, I can’t wait for Windows 14 to adopt it.
only atomic distros do that, and it has its downsides. most distros still only keep a single system partition, but if it does snapshots before update then it’s not a big deal if something goes wrong
script on desktop; shutdown -h now, or hit button
deleted by creator
A stop job is runningAt least it tells you how long it’ll take before it decides to SIGKILL whatever is holding the shutdown sequence.
Well you say that, but I’ve seen the countdown go past and then reset to a higher number often.
I entrust you with this horror, go figure out what to blame.
shutdown-analyze.sh
#! /usr/bin/env bash shutdown_start=$(journalctl -b -1 -u systemd-logind --grep="System is (powering down|rebooting)" --output=cat --no-pager --output-fields=_SOURCE_REALTIME_TIMESTAMP) shutdown_start=$((shutdown_start / 1000000)) units=$(journalctl -b -1 --since=@$shutdown_start --output=cat --no-pager --output-fields=UNIT JOB_TYPE=stop CODE_FUNC=job_emit_start_message) for u in $units; do stopping_start=$(journalctl -b -1 --since=@$shutdown_start -u "$u" --output=cat --no-pager --output-fields=_SOURCE_REALTIME_TIMESTAMP JOB_TYPE=stop CODE_FUNC=job_emit_start_message _SYSTEMD_UNIT=init.scope) stopping_end=$(journalctl -b -1 --since=@$shutdown_start -u "$u" --output=cat --no-pager --output-fields=_SOURCE_REALTIME_TIMESTAMP JOB_TYPE=stop CODE_FUNC=job_emit_done_message _SYSTEMD_UNIT=init.scope) duration_human=$(systemd-analyze timespan $((stopping_end - stopping_start))us | tail -1 | sed 's/.*: //') printf "%s\t%10s %s\n" $((stopping_end - stopping_start)) "$duration_human" "$u" done | sort -rn | cut -f 2Thanks, I usually know what it is tho. Most often it’s VMs I was using for testing stuff, which I forgot to shutdown. It takes a while for them to cleanly shutdown, which is what the wait is for. I have a shortcut on my desktop to a script that checks for any running VMs still and shuts them down. But I forget to click it sometimes and then I have to wait. No big deal, except I like to switch off the power bar that powers the computer and everything attached to it. An old habit from when such a thing mattered, these days standby power is probably nothing to worry about. But still I wait patiently for the computer to shut down till I switch off the power strip.
If your script somehow shuts them down faster than plain old SIGTERM, putting it under
/usr/lib/systemd/system-shutdown/might be a good idea. Checkman 8 systemd-shutdownfor more info on that.
Similar to angry parents.
I think that depends on the setting, I had situations where one of my docker containers took ages to shutdown and it would just say 00/02 00s but when it reached that limit, it would just go up.
Individual services can override the default 90 seconds timeout. But then you can override their override if you think you are smarter, of course.
Alt-SysRq-i, u, oI don’t have time for this shit.
have i learned a new magic combo?!
(X time / 1:30) but the second time will be extended indefinitely for some fucking reason.
Yes but no, u can in config file of systemd change timeout to 5,10 second or other number of seconds which u wish before it will kill it
My always plugged in HDD with bees on it does that. 1 minute to shutdown at least because there’s always some kind of extend read or dedupe that need a sync.
… I brought this upon myself so I don’t have to complain.
Why can’t it say what the job is 🧐🧐🧐
Actually, it usually does. I was just too lazy to think of one.
Reminds me of one of the truest comics I ever read.
It is weird isn’t it.
Why do they make it so bad?
I imagine half of linux users could make better automated update rules in their cron.
So many better ways.
So why are they making it intentionally bad?
… Sabotage from Microsoft employees who hate Microsoft?
… Part of a larger Embrace Extent Extinguish tactic, where they’ve already embraced the Linux Foundation etc enough, they’re ready to extinguish Windows, already having sufficient monopolistic total-control hooks in Linux???
What are they up to? There has to be a reason it’s so bad. There has to be a reason they go out of their way to make it so bad.
It surely can’t just be the effects of The Corporation, the hierarchies and compartmentalisations and bureaucracy of the structure where they don’t understand (or even perhaps do understand [and maybe have seen Kevlin Henney’s excellent talk on clean code vs enterprise programming] but) can’t do anything about it, can it?
What are they building in there? We don’t get to see, we don’t get to know, just trust them, they know best when and how, and so you are not allowed to change it.
We are not doing that any more.
Windows has had always a problem: unlike Unix, where files are referenced by an inode where the name points to, Windows has the names directly linked to the files. When Windows needs to update a system file that is in use it has to stop being used. And for some system files there only one way to do it: reboot. On Unix, the name of the file can change the inode where it points to and the system goes on. The old file exists until every process stops using it and then is erased while new processes access the new file. So no reboot is needed.
That leads to not having to update everything on reboot. Only the kernel and little more.
Having a monopoly makes you arrogant. That is probably the only reason why they do it.
Maybe train you into avoiding shutdowns, never shutdown, stay on Microsoft windows for ever, forget about other things like sleep or eating.
[** ] A stop job is running for Session c1 of User gdm (49s / 1min 30s)`[** ] A stop job is running for Session c1 of User gdm (4min 19s / 1min 30s)`
You read my mind
Windows cannot shut down because there is a folder open.
Windows cannot shut down because Bill still wants to keep watching you to see what you’re doing.
Windows cannot shutdown because there’s a Windows open.
I’ve never used systemd to shut down
Sudo shutdown -h now works on the Mac
In most distros
shutdownis a symlink tosystemctl.Oh interesting
Gentoo baby!
Huh.
Glad I don’t use “most distros”.
I just use poweroff.
i dunno I just normally do sudo poweroff.
I would delete this because it’s repeated but it’s too late.
Just
poweroffis fine. Why lose extra 2.5 seconds typing two words when one word will suffice?What?
sync ; sync ; sync ; shutdown -h nowOr nothing!
why?
It’s traditional, it used to be done that way on old systems. It was done for extra luck I suppose.
Nowadays, shutdown syncs as a matter of fact, and filesystems are much less brittle.
The machine spirit gets upset if you don’t perform the correct shutdown rites. Praise the Omnissiah.
Gotta make sure the FS cache syncs.
Not too sure, hence the use of semicolons instead of double ampersands, but a moderately high level of sure.
Before Linux had a shutdown command, you’d run “sync && sync && sync” then hit the power button.
is that true? i guess it makes sense. you dont “shutdown” DOS
How long ago was that?? Like 30 years ago?
3 syncs? Sun Microsystems trainers told me 2!
Seems risky to me…
why use many word when few word do trick
few words do.
cat spk les yet.
Just alias whatever to “off”
I just pull the power cord and let it figure it out
I’m not nearly as into Linux as everyone here. I just hobby manage docker containers for a home server. That was my first foray into Linux like 2 years ago. For whatever reason, this broke me for a few seconds lol
I think doing just a
poweroffmight leave some services in an unclean state. I thinksystemctl poweroffmake sure the services are shutdown cleanly before powering down.poweroffis just an alias tosystemctl poweroffon distros with systemdUnless you’re running a non-systemd-distro, poweroff and systemctl poweroff are literally the same …
