| |||||||||||||
'Safe mode' needed?'Safe mode' needed?Posted Dec 13, 2008 13:35 UTC (Sat) by epa (subscriber, #39769)In reply to: Ubuntu had same problem in 2006 by dwheeler Parent article: Instructions from Fedora on fixing the dbus problem
Perhaps as a precaution distributions should include a 'safe boot' option that loads a basic kernel, with just enough hardware support for network and disk access, and brings up the system in text mode letting the user install updates. Of course this is already possible with any Linux system, but we are seeing less technically capable users who don't understand boot parameters or how to use the shell. They would benefit from a minimal but still friendly interface that installs updates and reboots.
Ideally, this safe mode boot would never be needed.
(Log in to post comments)
'Safe mode' needed? Posted Dec 13, 2008 19:44 UTC (Sat) by engla (guest, #47454) [Link]
There is no perfect system, there will always be complex enough computer programs that they will need human input especially when something goes wrong. In this case, linux distributions should have a stronger, more coherent and more definitive way to go wrong and tell the user about it!
So if d-bus, X, or something else is missing, tell the user and give it the control., Recommending upgrading the system in such cases is not a bad idea (since that's how large-scale breakages are fixed).
|
|||||||||||||