Matthias G. Eckermann composed on 2015-01-20 10:47 (UTC+0100):
... and probably that "Teutonic heritage" is one of the reasons for your impression of "wasting disk cycles": over the last years in product management here at SUSE I personally was surprised about many details, or I even doubted the validity of implementation details. Well.
"Well"??? Until that word, I was following.
However, I also have learned that the approach of "better safe than sorry" often pays off in stability or reliability. Rewriting an unchanged file might be the result of this strategy.
Nevertheless, I understand your concerns, as soon as we are not talking "average" HDD/SDD devices, but flash devices with a low rewrite count.
That said, my suggestion is, to not approach your concern with an "all you can eat" FATE feature request, but document your examples in bugzilla and submit fixes to the individual packages you see responsible for that "waste" of disk cycles. That way you may learn, why things have been done the way they are, you may agree that it is the more safe approach, or you will have contributed to an improvement.
Laudable plan. Oh that each day had more hours and each year more days. I'm afraid the foreseeable future and possibly much longer portends an opposite change in contribution level from these aging bones and what controls them. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org