[tlug] How can my computer forget to do stuff sometimes?

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com>]

Dave M G writes:

 > What confuses me about this is that I don't see how anything can vary 
 > from boot to boot. As far as I understand it, when the computer boots, 
 > it runs through the same list of tasks to start things up, in the same 
 > order every single time.

Sure.  The problem is that the tasks take hidden parameters, which are
intended to try to replicate the state of your desktop exactly as it
was when you shutdown.  There's a well-known way to do this correctly,
assuming you don't dual boot: save all CPU registers and memory to
disk and stop the CPU.  Then reload the whole shebang on boot.  Of
course this is easier said than done, as anybody who's had problems
with suspend to disk knows.  But that's the theory.

GNOME doesn't do it correctly, nor do any of the programs that I know
of.  They only save part of the state.  The most horrible part of
GNOME is that they chose to emulate Windows in saving state in
unreadable ways where they user can't easily find it (Windows uses the
infamous registry, GNOME uses XML).

 > So if, for example, Emerald didn't load one time, simply rebooting 
 > shouldn't fix it. It should remain off every time.

No, because depending on how far it got in loading before fataling, it
may very well be saving parts of its post-reboot state to disk while
reloading state but before it crashes.  It probably will not be able
to save whatever it was that causes the fatal error.  If it doesn't,
that will fix the problem that caused loading to fail, but is in some
sense incorrect because it doesn't reproduce the state you left it in
when you last shut down.

 > The whole point of computers is to execute tasks exactly the same way 
 > each time.

No, the whole point of computers is to prevent users from violating
intellectual property laws and make life convenient for third parties
(and viruses) who want to use your computer without bothering you for
permission, at least according to Microsoft.  GNOME isn't much better.

Bottom line: If you want reliable results from your computer, don't
use software that tries to guess what you want.  It will sometimes be
wrong, but it will almost never be able to express its guesswork to
you.  Instead, use software that waits for your command.

IOW, as you say, you probably don't want this fixed.  90% reliability
isn't bad in return for a computer that guesses what you want
correctly 90% of the time.<wink>