3 ms·

Devils advocate… How should auto-updater work then?

duncan-donuts 5y ago
It shouldn’t?
nextaccountic 5y ago
Here it updates when I run pacman -Syu. If I were to use Firefox built-in update, I would want it to show me a popup asking me whether to update
- batch12 5y ago
  Well a popup asking if it okay to check for updates which would run every x times the browser is launched or on a schedule. The popup should have an option to not ask again for those that get annoyed. Otherwise the browser would need to call home to see if an update is available before asking if you want the new version of course.
fuzzer37 5y ago
It shouldn't. Users should be using a package manager to manage software. Windows fucked up users expectations by not including a sane one by default... ever. And no, Windows Store doesn't count.
- oblio 5y ago
  > Users should Users should and regular people should: * not smoke * not drink * eat healthy food in moderate amounts * ... "Should" almost never works, especially at scale.
- _vdpp 5y ago
  Package managers are a necessary evil on systems where installing software scatters a bunch of files all over because of a dogmatic adherence to an obsolete FHS. It’s a huge burden on either the distro maintainers or the developers to produce new packages for already-written software, which often results in outdated or broken releases available in the package repos. And now every language ecosystem has one or more package managers for development libs - pip, conda, cargo, npm, opam, dub, etc. - and then optional package managers like choco, homebrew, and probably some others I missed. It’s a huge mess. So instead we throw up our hands and just bundle everything we need in a container and duplicate the _whole distro_ because the “package” ecosystem is such a disaster. The sane way to handle software installs and uninstalls would have been cp/rm.
  - _vdpp 5y ago
    One more addition to my rant here - could we pick even more ridiculous, unintuitive names for package manager binaries? zypper? apt-get? yum? xbps-install? pacman at least kind of reminds you of “package manager”. This isn’t meant to dump all over the hard work that goes into all these. I suppose too that “install” is taken by a command which copies files with certain flags (anyone ever use this?). Every one of these uses different flags too, so for someone who uses a number of different distros it’s a huge pain to remember them and switch back and forth. FreeBSD at least uses the eminently sensible “pkg” command with flags like “search” and “add.”

It shouldn’t?

Here it updates when I run pacman -Syu. If I were to use Firefox built-in update, I would want it to show me a popup asking me whether to update

batch12 5y ago
Well a popup asking if it okay to check for updates which would run every x times the browser is launched or on a schedule. The popup should have an option to not ask again for those that get annoyed. Otherwise the browser would need to call home to see if an update is available before asking if you want the new version of course.

fuzzer37 5y ago

It shouldn't. Users should be using a package manager to manage software. Windows fucked up users expectations by not including a sane one by default... ever. And no, Windows Store doesn't count.

oblio 5y ago
> Users should Users should and regular people should: * not smoke * not drink * eat healthy food in moderate amounts * ... "Should" almost never works, especially at scale.
_vdpp 5y ago
Package managers are a necessary evil on systems where installing software scatters a bunch of files all over because of a dogmatic adherence to an obsolete FHS. It’s a huge burden on either the distro maintainers or the developers to produce new packages for already-written software, which often results in outdated or broken releases available in the package repos. And now every language ecosystem has one or more package managers for development libs - pip, conda, cargo, npm, opam, dub, etc. - and then optional package managers like choco, homebrew, and probably some others I missed. It’s a huge mess. So instead we throw up our hands and just bundle everything we need in a container and duplicate the _whole distro_ because the “package” ecosystem is such a disaster. The sane way to handle software installs and uninstalls would have been cp/rm.
- _vdpp 5y ago
  One more addition to my rant here - could we pick even more ridiculous, unintuitive names for package manager binaries? zypper? apt-get? yum? xbps-install? pacman at least kind of reminds you of “package manager”. This isn’t meant to dump all over the hard work that goes into all these. I suppose too that “install” is taken by a command which copies files with certain flags (anyone ever use this?). Every one of these uses different flags too, so for someone who uses a number of different distros it’s a huge pain to remember them and switch back and forth. FreeBSD at least uses the eminently sensible “pkg” command with flags like “search” and “add.”