🚀 go-pugleaf

"Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in
news:geatk4teder98jtih7hkiuejtkacai067i@4ax.com: 

> On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:29:48 -0600, Lookout <mrLookout@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Not if your regularly use a registry cleaner. I use FixIt Utilities
>> and to delete invalid or no longer need registry entries and files. 
> 
> 
> That's a very dangerous and poor thing to do, in my view. 
> 
> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of the
> registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the registry alone and
> don't use any registry cleaner. Despite what many people think, and
> what vendors of registry cleaning software try to convince you of,
> having unused registry entries doesn't really hurt you. 
> 
> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner erroneously
> removing an entry you need is far greater than any potential benefit
> it may have. 
> 
> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html

This was my whole point from the start.  

Having unused reigstry entries lying around does not cause the bugs that 
slowly accumulate under Windows.  It is caused by uninstalling codes in 
some order other than the reverse of how they were installed.  

When you do that, the system reverts to previous version of the saved 
files that were in place when you did the install, and those files don't 
account for any new installs that you did, along the way.  There's no 
way out of this headache other than to redesign the uninstall procedure 
so that it doesn't revert to those saved files.  

Although it may have some small faults, Linux is a *lot* more 
bulletproof than Windows, which means that it doesn't use that uninstall 
method.  I'd like to know what it does use, so I can better understand 
the OS design issues associated with this problem.