5 ms·
> but why would you? Because updates can introduce breaking changes. And potentially new security vulnerabilities.
by y7 5y ago
> but why would you?
Because updates can introduce breaking changes. And potentially new security vulnerabilities.
- ruined 5y agowhile technically true, updates seem to introduce fixing changes and close confirmed security vulnerabilities at a much higher rate. but you can flip the switch if you really must.
- kaba0 5y agoSo you prefer old and known/already exploited security vulnerabilities?
- anonymousab 5y agoForegoing security updates to avoid breaking changes and severe functionality regressions is a completely valid choice that should be wholly left up to the user.
- RussianCow 5y agoIt is left up to the user—you can disable auto-updates if you so wish. But it seems completely reasonable to have them be enabled by default.
- dotancohen 5y agoYes! Linus calls this trading old bugs for new bugs, and is vehemently against introducing commits that may introduce new bugs, no matter the severity of the bug that the commit squashes.
- kaba0 5y agoLinus is known to have strong opinions and he can be often very wrong. Also, linux is not the epitome of security, so I don’t see how it applies here — I would much prefer if half of all computers wouldn’t turn into a giant bot net.