this post was submitted on 23 May 2024
478 points (98.8% liked)

linuxmemes

20880 readers
9 users here now

I use Arch btw


Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 132 points 5 months ago (2 children)

You know if you use temple_os you don't have to worry about updates?

[–] [email protected] 100 points 5 months ago

It is impossible to update perfection

[–] [email protected] 28 points 5 months ago (2 children)

You do have to worry about some things though. I couldn't say what those things are, but I have a hunch that temple_os users have some pretty unique worries.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Help! My boot loader got corrupted by SATAN!

[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago

You need to excorcise those daemons!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

Oh yes. Like the fucking CIA and the FBI.

[–] [email protected] 80 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

WTF are all these "Refresh of version..." updates? Am I unfresh? Do I need to bathe? (probably)

Edit: It's like it saw my post from yesterday and said "oh you like that do you?"

[–] [email protected] 59 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I had been wondering about that too so I looked it up and apparently it's just what discover displays whenever there's an update that doesn't change the version number which is things like rebuilds with a newer compiler. Very confusing wording, I feel like just "update of version [version]" would be less confusing

[–] bitfucker 18 points 5 months ago (1 children)

This is why semver is a thing. If a program is released under 1.1.x, and then recompiled with a new compiler, then it can be 1.1.y where y > x

[–] [email protected] 23 points 5 months ago (1 children)

A recompilation or repackaging of Linux 6.6.6 is still Linux 6.6.6

[–] bitfucker 10 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Yeah, but in the context of flatpak isn't the distribution managed by the developer themselves? Also, in the distro release version case, they usually add something distro specific to differentiate it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

isn't the distribution managed by the developer themselves?

No, most often it's not.
Valve literally just had a fiasco with them not long ago with them falsely marking steam as verified when Valve are not the ones packing the Flatpak.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure about specific packages, but in general a packager may not want to increase the upstream version even if they can do it themselves - for example, they may have made some mistake in the packaging process.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago
[–] [email protected] 47 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I mean, I just set my system to only check for updates once a week.

There's no real reason to install every update, the second it's available. If there's a big security fix you should get asap, you'll hear about it.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago

Yeah I think I'm gonna do that, thanks

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That little up arrow in the sys tray might as well be a gun to my head

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

Which is why you reduce the frequency at which the system checks for updates.

Once I get notified it's irresistible.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

At some point I think some devs might be refactoring a switch-case into an if-else and calling it an "update" to troll downstreams.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 5 months ago (1 children)

apparently fools consider a finished app "dead" or "abandoned" if there isn't a new release every week. so yeah, dev's will just change a comment to not have their apps shunned

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

For a correct metric one must multiply the time since last update by the number of open issues

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

For me if an app doesn't get updated within 13 months, I'll look for an alternative, why 13 ? It's my cursed unlucky number...

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Try whatever ublue floats your boat, it all happens in the background, the power of atomic updates baby, if something breaks, just go back to the previous one...

[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago

Atomic updates!? I don't think my PC has the proper radiation shielding for atomic updates...

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I get the same messages, despite using uBlue.
It's because of Flatpak.

I disabled the notifications and enabled daily/ weekly auto-updates of Flatpaks, otherwise I would get spammed to oblivion.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

enable flatpak-system-update.service if it's not...works for me.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Flatpak runtimes aren't part of atomic updates.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

but flatpak-system-update.service is a part of ublue

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Joke's on you, I use Arch and already reboot twice a day for updates.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You're rebooting for updates?? I just use an infinite recursion of chroots.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

"The day the chroots came chrashing down"

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago

There's really no need to update every instance one pops up.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago

this is why you never go full flatpak

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago

This is the part i dislike like with Fedora compared with Ubuntu. It is so many updates.

But since you can choose the time when to install the updates, there is a less of a problem.

Normally you don't notice any difference. And updates is much faster to install on Linux in general. Windows eats loads of CPU.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

I reboot every day thanks to arch.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

This is why I use the LTS edition for my OS

Edit: I'm a dum dum and didn't know flatpak updates showed up like that.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That doesn't make any difference to Flatpaks.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

Ah, is that what is happening here. I didn't realise.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Meh. No Flatpak, no worries. And no updates, no new software or security patches.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Speaking of Debian:

No bugfixes? Yes. The software will not be changed to fix a usual bug.

No security patches? No. Security patches are applied.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I have Debian on my servers for a decade or so, and on several workstations. My past experience doesn't quite reflect that. The Debian guys and gals have always been pretty quick with patching the vulnerabilities. Like outstanding fast.

There is some merit to the bugfixing. But that's kind of the point of Debian Stable(?!) Like in the meme picture of this post I don't want updates each day. And I also don't want the software on my servers to change too much on their own. I know my bugs and have already dealt with them and I'm happy that it now works seamlessly for 6 months or so...

And that's also why I have Debian Testing on my computer. That gives me sort of an unofficial rolling distro. With lots of updates and bugfixes. I mean in the end you can't have no updates and lots of updates at the same time. It's either - or. And we can choose depending on the use-case. (I think the blame is on the admin if they choose a wrong tool for a task.)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

Exactly. The Debian team is quite conservative in fixing non-critical bugs in the stable branch, as it may introduce new bugs.

If one wants more up-to-date software, the testing branch is a valid choice or Siduction, if one is brave enough.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 months ago (1 children)

new features? We don't do that here.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Wait what, the newest version has been released december 2022?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

The point of my original post was that their update cadence is slower. The point of my followup reply is that they are not devoid of updates, either.

They have a release every 1-2 years, and it's packed full for various tweeks, improvements, and new features. They fix broken shit, and enhance where it makes sense.

I don't need my window manager to get fad features, and I don't need constant updates. It does what I want it to do already.

xfce ftw.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

This is flatpak updates

load more comments
view more: next ›