Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft suggests command line fiddling to get Windows 10 update installed

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 223 posts

Re: Microsoft suggests command line fiddling to get Windows 10 update installed

#91

Post by JeffSnazz »

reactordev wrote: post #77
JeffSnazz wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This attitude seems a little silly to me—being "extra vigilant, pedantic and strict" about happy-path code would necessarily imply the same about "exception and error paths". Generally speaking, bugs mostly appear in a binary fashion and not in varying degrees—ie your code either reflect expected behavior or doesn't.

You'd be surprised at how many await 's it takes to produce a try/catch . The attitude of being extra vigilant, pedantic, and strict around exception and error paths forces the happy path to be as well defined as it possibly can be given the requirements. It's defensive programming. Assume everything will break in ways you don't know about when writing it. Especially true for async/await code. I don't find it silly.…

> It's defensive programming.

This would necessarily presume applying the same attitude towards the happy path—you're describing something short of that.

Or to put it a different way: defensive programming necessarily implies a skepticism that you even are sure what the happy/error paths are!

Re: Microsoft suggests command line fiddling to get Windows 10 update installed

#92

Post by tsm »

maximus-decimus wrote: post #62
EspadaV9 wrote: post #7

When installing the update, some users are finding themselves faced with an 0x80070643 error, a generic failure message. Unfortunately, according to Microsoft, "because of an error in the error code handling routine," this might not be the correct error. Error in the error code code is giving the wrong error code for the error. I'm curious how often the error code code needs touching that there is an error in there t…

This is how I imagine the error code looks. How else can you even return the wrong error? ```c# public class FooError { public Message(){ //TODO: I copy pasted this from somewhere else. I still need to update to a meaningful message return "this is a BarError" } } ```

The logic in the `catch` block could be complex enough that they got an if/else backwards or something like that. E.g., they could catch an exception and then have the body of the `catch` return six different error messages based on details about the exception, system status, etc.

Re: Microsoft suggests command line fiddling to get Windows 10 update installed

#93

Post by reactordev »

JeffSnazz wrote: post #91
reactordev wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd be surprised at how many await 's it takes to produce a try/catch . The attitude of being extra vigilant, pedantic, and strict around exception and error paths forces the happy path to be as well defined as it possibly can be given the requirements. It's defensive programming. Assume everything will break in ways you don't know about when writing it. Especially true for async/await code. I don't find it silly.…

> It's defensive programming. This would necessarily presume applying the same attitude towards the happy path—you're describing something short of that. Or to put it a different way: defensive programming necessarily implies a skepticism that you even are sure what the happy/error paths are!

Oh you definitely apply the same attitude to happy path at the end after scrutinizing the exception/error path options.

Re: Microsoft suggests command line fiddling to get Windows 10 update installed

#94

Post by carlosjobim »

trelane wrote: post #61
carlosjobim wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except for if you want to use dual monitors, etc. etc. Every time I've tried Linux, I've had to dive into the terminal and paste commands from the internet to get normal things to work.

Only two monitors? I've no problem with more than that. I don't know what hardware you're using, but that's atypical.

Two monitors with different DPI. Couldn't get them to work well without running a weird xrandr script on every boot with some "1.9999999999...." setting.

Re: Microsoft suggests command line fiddling to get Windows 10 update installed

#95

Post by maleldil »

berkes wrote: post #65
Zyst wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Linux. You absolutely need to drop down to the command line at times. Upgrading my Kennel, or Graphics driver breaks something like 20% of the time for me.

Strange. I've been on Linux some 28 years now, and it used to be like that¹. But today? I haven't had a kernel or graphics driver update failing on me for years. Maybe 10+ years? Granted, my Linux is the most boring, hardly-configged Unbuntu LTS. Boring hardware. Boring drivers. Everything optimized to "Just Work" - My machine pays my bills and if I'm down for a day because I fiddled around with some fancy custom tra…

What hardware? Your experience with Linux can be very different depending on that. For example, my laptop's WiFi refuses to work properly on Linux, so I'm forced to use Windows.

Edit: oh, and not to mention graphics (Nvidia), multiple monitors and HiDPI, especially with fractional scaling and different multiples per display. HiDPI on Linux doesn't work nearly as well as Windows and macOS.

Re: Microsoft suggests command line fiddling to get Windows 10 update installed

#96

Post by JeffSnazz »

reactordev wrote: post #93
JeffSnazz wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's defensive programming. This would necessarily presume applying the same attitude towards the happy path—you're describing something short of that. Or to put it a different way: defensive programming necessarily implies a skepticism that you even are sure what the happy/error paths are!

Oh you definitely apply the same attitude to happy path at the end after scrutinizing the exception/error path options.

> This is why I am extra vigilant, pendantic and strict when writing or reviewing code that handles exception and error paths.

I realize that this is a different person from you, but that's the attitude I am replying to.

Re: Microsoft suggests command line fiddling to get Windows 10 update installed

#97

Post by carlosjobim »

mr_mitm wrote: post #47
carlosjobim wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except for if you want to use dual monitors, etc. etc. Every time I've tried Linux, I've had to dive into the terminal and paste commands from the internet to get normal things to work.

Was this in the past decade or before?

A couple of years ago.

Re: Microsoft suggests command line fiddling to get Windows 10 update installed

#98

Post by jstummbillig »

gchamonlive wrote: post #28
bheadmaster wrote: post #10

Glad to see that Microsoft is making Windows more and more similar to Linux by every passing day :)

You mean 90's Linux?

Are you claiming that using Linux in 2023 will not pretty much require "command line fiddling" to some unavoidable degree (unless you have somebody else do the setup for you and day to day just use what's there)? Because, if so, that would very much not be my experience. Broadly speaking, what advancements am I likely missing out on?

Re: Microsoft suggests command line fiddling to get Windows 10 update installed

#99

Post by sixothree »

bheadmaster wrote: post #10

Glad to see that Microsoft is making Windows more and more similar to Linux by every passing day :)

Did a fresh install of windows 11 yesterday and winget doesn’t work. Seriously. I haven’t even installed any software yet.

Re: Microsoft suggests command line fiddling to get Windows 10 update installed

#100

Post by hooby »

bheadmaster wrote: post #10

Glad to see that Microsoft is making Windows more and more similar to Linux by every passing day :)

I really do not agree with this comparison.

Yes, it is true, that on Linux there are many, many things which are best done through command line fiddling.

But installing a system update, that update borking things, belching up a totally cryptic error message, and then forcing you to clean up the mess through the command line, is nothing something I've experienced on Linux so far. For me, apt updates have always been super reliable - and error messages have mostly been quite specific and easy to google.

So, this specific case seems nothing like Linux to me.

Post reply on HN