Actually, PCLinuxOS doesn’t even update the kernels by itself. The user must explicitly indicate that they want to install a newer version of the same kernel(s).
As for their methodology, PCLinuxOS started off as a fork from Mandriva, so a lot of their procedures were directly taken over from Mandriva. The main differences however were that PCLinuxOS only comes as installable live images ─ which was not the case for Mandriva at the time ─ and that PCLinuxOS also uses a port of Debian’s
synaptic in combination with
.rpm-based packages, plus that they also enable proprietary graphics drivers by default when supported.
Um, now you’re signing me up for something that I never volunteered for.
Personally, I have no problem with the way Manjaro ─ or for that matter, Arch ─ updates its kernels, because I have simply accepted that updating the entire system by definition implies that one must reboot. It’s the simplest and cleanest scenario, even.
The only thing I do have a problem with in this regard ─ and as has been exposed by this thread ─ is that
kernel-alive comes installed by default, because it violates the integrity of
/usr as a read-only and shareable part of the filesystem hierarchy.
UNIX filesystems always comprise four categories of files and directories, between which there is some overlap: read-only versus writable, and shareable versus non-shareable. For instance…
/bootis read-only but non-shareable;
/usris read-only and shareable;
/homeis writable and shareable;
/varis writeable but non-shareable;
- et al.
kernel-modules-hook both violate this, but the difference is that
kernel-modules-hook is an optional package from the Community repo, whereas
kernel-alive comes pre-installed as a package from the Core repo. And that is what’s wrong.