POLL: Keep EndeavourOS Update Notifier?

Lounge EndeavourOS pub
22

I’d rather see the valuable time in other things. Outside if testing I’ve literally never used or even installed it.

1 Like
23

It does no harm and is helpful to new/less advanced users - I vote to keep it, even if I do not use it. More advanced users can easily disable it if they find it to be an irritation.

1 Like
24

My initial thought was I don’t really mind.
When I don’t really mind, I’m usually all for the option that makes the dev’s life easier (in this case: discard it).

But then I read the comments, especially:

This is a great use-case that makes a lot more sense to me.
A perfect example for this functionality, is “marking” broken packages.

Example (from my recent experience):

  1. Issue: pipewire* 1:0.3.77-1 duplicates plasma-pa entries
  2. Downgraded (manual intervention) pipewire to 1:0.3.76-2
  3. set-update-notifier pipewire > 1:0.3.77-1 ( “>” meaning the current available update introduces the issue, I need to be notified on next available version)

With that in mind, I changed my vote to “Might need it some day” just in case the team would be up to expanding the software.

25

If I interpret your idea correctly, you can mark package updates as ignored in file /etc/pacman.conf (setting IgnorePkg).

26

I know you can. My example has nothing to do in regards to “applying” the updates, but rather getting a “valuable notification”.

I agree with others that a notification that “there are X updates” on an Arch based system is meaningless. That changes, if the notification informs me an issue I’m facing will be solved by the available updates.

27

A “do not update” notifier because there is some issue that requires attention, like the grub debacle, would be more suitable if you would ask me.

2 Likes
28

If you mark a package ignored, pacman will not update the package, and also informs user about not updating it. That way user sees there is an update, and the new version is also there.

A notification system cannot (easily) know if a particular update will solve a particular issue.

Anyway, discussing what IgnorePkg does is not the point of this thread, but maybe another thread.

29

I have used IgnorePkg (usually, indeed, every time something is broken) and understand how it works.
I am not discussing updates in this thread, I’m discussing purely notifications.

Scenario (just to clear things up, because it seems like I didn’t do a good job of explaining it :P):

Current:

  1. Issue: pipewire* 1:0.3.77-1 duplicates plasma-pa entries
  2. Let’s say I do not downgrade (so my system remains “somewhat broken” until I get a solution)
  3. Next day I get a notification that there are X updates
  4. I run sudo pacman -Syu and see there are some random unrelated updates (eg a new linux version, chromium, re2, libreoffice, whatever)
  5. I apply those updates (this notification was not really useful)
  6. Next day I get a notification that there are Y updates
  7. I run sudo pacman -Syu and see there are some random unrelated updates (eg new Firefox)
  8. I apply those updates (this notification was not really useful)
  9. Next day I get a notification that there are K updates
  10. I run sudo pacman -Syu and it is the new pipewire
  11. I apply the update (this notification WAS useful)

Suggested:

  1. Issue: pipewire* 1:0.3.77-1 duplicates plasma-pa entries
  2. Let’s say I do not downgrade (so my system remains “somewhat broken” until I get a solution)
  3. I mark that I want a notification for pipewire > 1:0.3.77-1
  4. Next day I get no notification (even though new linux, chromium, re2 etc are available)
  5. Next day I get no notification (even though new Firefox is available)
  6. Next day I get a notification “There is an update for pipewire > 1:0.3.77-1”
  7. I run sudo pacman -Syu

This is a fair point.
Still getting a notification that

A package you’ve marked broken has available updates

is (in my personal, subjective opinion) way more usefull than “There are available updates”

Agreed. I only posted on this one last time to make clear exactly what I meant.
I won’t expand further to avoid going out-of-topic :slight_smile:

1 Like
30

Some suggestions. Sorry if it already knows that.

  1. Check the AUR too
  2. notify only for certain packages
  3. maybe hook it into https://gitlab.com/ilpianista/arch-audit
31

I went with “Irrelevant to me”. I , personally, find no use in having a notifier remind me a daily task (for me) after of course checking with Arch News. But other users might find it’s got its use. So, “irrelevant” to me.

32

I think it is time to remind all that the purpose of this thread is to find out whether there is a real need for keeping the update notifier, or remove it altogether.
The purpose was not to ponder which new features would be nice to have.

Since we already have the Welcome app which has update system button(s) on it, the need for an update notifier (even for complete newbies to the Arch world) is very much reduced. And removing the update notifier will allow some more time of the devs to other more useful things, as some already pointed out.

3 Likes
33

I like it. Reminds me to update once a week. Honestly, there are sometimes days, even weeks that I don’t even sit down near my computer. I’d actually like to have a push notification on my phone about updating my computer. Or better yet, have automatic updates, that have been tested as safe to do.

2 Likes
34

I voted to keep it although it means little to me. I’m already updating in the terminal before it even pops up.
Not a fan of redundancies in linux, but I like this redundancy for no reason I could tell you other than a reminder to update never hurts. You can script the thing for half a second, I’m sure. Feels like 2s right now which is fine.

1 Like
35

You don’t use the notifier at all, it just popes up a message to tell you there are updates. You can set it to notify you daily, weekly, every N days… You can use the “EOS Update from Terminal” app which runs an EOS specific update, and although it’s in the terminal, you don’t need any command lines, it asks 3 or 4 questions, and it’s easy to learn how to answer them. I made a launcher for it and launch it every few days.

1 Like
36

I have my own notifier triggered by a timer, it is a reminder as well as a way to know if the waiting updates are important or not. It just opens a notification popup, nothing else.

37

I voted to retain the update notifier.

  • Yes, users who have an organized update schedule won’t need it, but I enjoy not thinking about maintenance all of the time.

  • Yes, it would be more useful if it notified me when applications that I have explicitly installed (or have indicated interest in) are available, but it is a handy reminder as it is.

Seeing the notification two or three times is usually enough motivation to get me to actually spend time running the update, assuming that nothing more urgent is going on. This is a case where a little redundancy - not shaving the system down to the bare essentials - is nice.

In a similar vein, though I have used Linux/UNIX for decades, I still like the visual confirmation that appears in Xfce when I click on logout. It is simply reassuring that the system is giving me a chance to correct a dumb mistake, or in the case of the notifier, reminding me of what needs doing.

After all, who are we making the system for? Ourselves, or the growing Linux community? Let’s continue to make the system friendly and forgiving, to the extent that this can be easily done.

3 Likes
38

I strongly agree. But it seems like it’s already been decided that this feature will be removed as to the developer would prefer to focus on other projects. =/

39

After almost a week, so far most users seem to want to keep this app.
The poll will be open the whole September, and in October the result of the poll will be available.
So stay tuned! :wink:

40

With Arch, there are always updates. For myself, I use arch-audit-gtk instead. That way, I’ll get a notification if a pending update is security sensitive.

2 Likes
42

There are always outliers in any group (me for instance) and I don’t see that it hurts to have such a service available. I would not suggest expansion of its capabilities, or even changes unless it breaks!

I personally track updates much more closely than any update-notifier does - I maintain a vertically scrolling list of available updates for both ‘tracks’, ie including the AUR - so I guess I am guilty of hitting the mirrors more than necessary! However - I like to know things like “9 + 9 new | 0 ignored” and to be able to check the list to see if anything awaited or of interest is pending…

As for the dev time - I strongly suspect more time has been spent on this thread than on the notifier in quite some time! It works - for some it’s useful - and it shouldn’t need much maintenance (I think). If it becomes a maintenance drag on resources, then I would change my vote to dump…