Linux Mint Forums

Do you think the Update Manager should be installed by default or not?

Please read this before voting: http://www.linuxmint.com/blog/?p=54

Thank you
Clem

I think update manager should be installed by default but that the user should have the choice to turn it on. Also the choice as to which types of updates they want to monitor, ie security updates or general updates.

Life is all about choice.
Lets not take life away from the people just because some don't appreciate it.

Ronnie

The best way is a mintTool, which can activated over mintAssistant.

Clem

I respect you, also I admire you.

But believe me, I prefer an unstable OS inted of an NO-SECURE OS.

This is the main reason Windows users come to Linux, they're looking for freedom, security and acknowledgment.

Regards

No security updates?? ... Nope sorry. That's the wrong way. Especially when it comes to network-facing programs (e.g. web browsers, e-mail programs, openssh-server, samba, nfs, ....) Linux wouldn't be what it is today without the many security updates that are made available to the user more or less instantly when a security flaw is detected. Compare this to Windows .... where Microsoft deliberately choses not to fix security holes even after years because they decide it's not important for the users.

Linux distros have demonstrated time and time again that Microsoft's ways are outright wrong. You cannot play games with security and just cross your fingers and hope that nothing bad will happen.

If there is a security hole: Name it, inform the users, and for God's sake: have them update their systems asap.

We don't need a second Windows.

I have to confess: I already installed Update Manager and Update Notifier onto Celena through Synaptic.

Weighing the pros and cons, it was either a) take the remote risk that an update will make my system buggy, in which case I can re-install and merely exclude the buggy update, or b) have NO security updates.

In the end, it was a pretty easy choice to make. So yeah, keep the Update Manager installed by default.

Update manager installed by default; AND a first-run popup to ask user if he wants to disable it or leave it enabled. Probably I'm a lazy man, but I think that progress means to have more time for myself and my jobs instead of wasting it by checking manually for updates.

Anyway, thanks for the greatest linux distro ever!

For me no update manager. (clem I fear to put misled of button in voting, I wanted to click on No) I never liked the pop-up messages of the update manager and it is useless... Open Synaptic, reload packages and click update (or use a terminal) it's very easy. Just say to newbies to do it regularly.

In windows or in my other distro I don't want an automatic update or a pop-up message when one is available. I update regularly and when I decide it (one time every day in a terminal)

I guess that a good compromise will be to indicate security updates, programs updates... are available (with an icon, no pop-up please) and not to indicate those which can pose problem like the kernel by example.

But the backports and proposed repositories must be actived by default So security updates.

ede wrote: every newbie will NOT update kernel-updates by a mistake, and therefore continue to have a stable system.

Yes, I agree with that about kernel but not for security updates.

stability on your desktop is more important than getting the latest security updates.

Stability is great but provides security patches in a timely manner during the official lifetime is necessary.

I think we should have a mint tool for this, but keep it in for now. Perhaps a compromise would be to take update-notifier off of the list of start-up programs, so that the user must be at least semi-conscious of her decision to update the system.

I've been thinking about this
Given the reaction by scorp123, who's opinion I really respect, I think we should use update manager at least until we can make a mint tool for that
I have provided Clem with a truly simple piece of code that turns off the dist-upgrade message and mintAssistant locks the kernel.
These are the two major setbacks of update manager
I don't know if there's a risk that some mint specific tool would be updated with "the wrong" Ubuntu file, that's something Clem has to check.
One way would be to have our own repositories....

I think that MInt users need to give more support to our Distro.

We need more testers, we need huge donations, we need people who really want to improve and not only ask for.

Come om guys!

It's time to give more support to Mint developers, it's time to donate for create our -self repositories and finish of this kind of alternatives because we are depending of Ubuntu repositories.

Now should be change everything

Cheers

clem wrote:Do you think the Update Manager should be installed by default or not?

Please read this before voting: http://www.linuxmint.com/blog/?p=54

Thank you
Clem

I came here becauuse I thought you offered a 'easier' to use linux than ubuntu...gave new windows converts a break on some unnecessarily rough things to accomplish over there but I gotta say Im absolutely stunned you would risk someone's security of their system or a app or some kernel fix so so we can be l33t and say we upgrade when WE WANT not our systems ?

Is ubuntu considering this move, - if not why is linuxmint ??

My security is less important to you than some outdated notion that linux doesn't need reminders of important changes like windows and fedora, ubuntu, mandriva, freespire, suse and most top 10 + distros do ?

I was considering leaving mint because well..for no good reason that I can see ( IM not running anything extra at all ) I get cpu spikes of about 12% every few seconds and that to me is unacceptable so this added to that shows me that linuxmint is but another half-baked attempt at a copy cat scenario of ubuntu apparantly for self glory as this latest move makes clear..its all about ego isn't it instead of helping the user stay protected or informed....I just can't stand l33t minds ; the dripping testosterone and total disregard for my rights is really disturbing

I also flat out can't believe that ANY of you would be happy with this change...you must be kidding.

IT really drives home articles like this doesn't it::

http://www.desktoplinux.com/articles/AT3304051309.html

When linux is struggling ( time will tell ) to be recognized and therefore get more deserved hardware and software support from various vendors and more crossplatform games being done,- do yourself a favor and come here and see why , and dont you dare shout about how linux is shunned by companies in favor of the M$ monopoly, because it willl have been the linux attitude that has done it in.

cheers
nl

I think I would rather let the mint team decide what updates are needed for the distro, after all it is in they're best interest to to keep Mint as stable and secure as possible. So far they haven't let us down.
I know when an update is needed and I know how to get them, so why should I get nagged about it?

I think that we could use mintassistant to enable the update manager (which must be installed by default I believe). Whether or not you choose to update should be up to you to decide.

Ede: I think you touched upon a point I made earlier, that Update Manager and Update Notifier can be installed if they're excluded anyway.

Again, it's as simple as

Code: Select all

sudo apt-get install update-manager

, yet, people are complaining... *sigh*

By the same logic, one could say to those who find pop-ups such a pain that they can simply use Synaptic to uninstall UM and UN. Seeing that few people find security updates an annoyance - as opposed to a vital part of their online experience - I'd say the uninstall option is an important one to bring up.

In any event, I'll be sticking with Mint, and crafting it to my tastes, no matter what the final verdict is. I truly love this distro and can feel all the love that went into making it.

[deleted, see below]

Ede wrote:After some thinking, the best solution would be that it's installed by default, but it wont open and search for updates automagicaly. Mint-assistant can ask if automatic updates should be enabled or not, and at the same time warn about the stability-risks.

I do like that idea. I think the most important thing to have in mind is what brings most people to Linux in the first place - flexibility, user choice, and security.

In the end, I'm glad we can bring together ideas that help the developers who break their backs putting this thing together for us.

In Celena KDE i have only removed adept-notifier.

so you can still update but you will not get the little icon next to the clock telling you there are updates available.

I vote yes, selected the one underneath it on accident. But I say YES.