Comment by tomxor

4 years ago

I own an XPS, it runs Debian, it only installs updates when I tell it to.

Even if I decided to use the untended upgrades package, it wouldn't do it when I sleep the computer... that would just be stupid.

14 comments

tomxor

Reply
alimov  4 years ago

Yeah it might be unwanted behavior for your particular setup. Personally, on macOS and windows, I would prefer not to be at the computer when an update occurs - I also dont want to have to go do something else while I wait for the update. Just feels like a waste of time in my opinion. However, if I had reason to care about an update or the changes it was introducing I too would not want background updates running when I put my machine to sleep. I guess for an average user updating when the machine is not in use is a feature, while for the tech crowd that kind of behavior can mess with your preferred setup.

  • beowulfey  4 years ago

    Running updates are only a problem on Mac or Windows. Updates on the different linux flavors I’ve used take fractions of the time, are unobtrusive (I can continue to do work), and as a bonus, never fail to make my aging self feel like a technoir hacker with all that rapidly scrolling text. It’s all whole different ball game.

    • microtonal  4 years ago

      Different user groups, different priorities. I had a colleague who was a seasoned C hacker and long-time Linux user (but not someone who'd be very interested in how a Linux distribution or package manager works). Their Ubuntu system indicated that there were updates. So, they started the update. However, it was taking too much time and they wanted to go home, so they shut down the machine during the update. Unfortunately, it left the system in a bad, (IIRC) unbootable state and the local sysadmin had to spend an hour to get the system in a consistent state again.

      Is it reasonable to expect that you can just yank the chord during an upgrade? Maybe, maybe not. But users have the expectation that it is ok, there can be a power interruption after all.

      This would never happen with a macOS update, which uses an immutable root file system and APFS containers to switch the root after an update. Or an OSTree system like Silverblue, Fedora IOT, or Fedore CoreOS. Traditional Linux packages fall flat on their face in such scenarios (unless you use a lot of band-aid like filesystem snapshots, set up GRUB to handle boot into the right snapshot, etc.)

      I think it is uncharitable to assume that the people making macOS (or Windows) update are incompetent. They may just have a different set of requirements and constraints.

      4 replies →

  • tharkun__  4 years ago

    I always assumed it was smart enough though not to do it when it's on battery as it is very likely that the device is also in a confined space, such as a laptop backpack waiting for the trip to the office next morning.

    If I have it sitting on power and thus likely just on the top of the table and I have auto-updates on, sure do them when I'm not around as long as they are updates that can run unattended. Note the "if auto-updates are on" part, which luckily you can still disable on MacOS.

    • alimov  4 years ago

      I think macOS has a minimum battery charge requirement that has to be met before an update occurs in the unplugged scenario.

  • emkoemko  4 years ago

    people on linux wait for updates? i thought that was a thing only for mac and windows... never noticed or seen a update screen on linux unlike the Windows nightmare where it would even kick you out of your work to do a damn update

    • microtonal  4 years ago

      people on linux wait for updates?

      Yes, Fedora downloads packages first and then reboots the machine to perform the actual updates and then reboots again into the updated system [1]. You can still run dnf update manually, but the recommended path is the former one. Why? Because in contrast to what many commenters say here, in-place updates of Linux systems can go wrong. Apparently, Fedora have encountered this often enough that they they have started doing 'offline updates'.

      (The proper solution, which Silverblue/Fedora IoT/Fedora coreOS/NixOS/GUIX do is to make system updates atomic with roll-back.)

      [1] https://fedoramagazine.org/offline-updates-and-fedora-35/

      2 replies →