No "No Updates" Choice

[Kirk Fraser]

Binary package hint: firefox

The problem with frequent updates in BOTH Ubuntu and Windows is the programmers fail to do a complete test suite on all compatible software so they introduce glitches that are not present in the standard release. There should be a button where the user can select "no updates" for most updates and only allow the major releases like a Win Service Pack 2 or equivalent through as an update where the update writers have done adequate homework.

Perhaps there should be a 3 choice box where the user can choose "no updates ever", "all updates as available", and "major updates only".

In addition, although Window's update rollback feature has at times been brittle, I see no update rollback feature at all in Ubuntu or Firefox. If that were available., I would try to remove the bug in my last bug report that way.

Ubuntu 6 is a security risk -- I could detect a virus by its effects on Firefox and my gmail service. Ubuntu 7 is much better but how can I have confidence it won't get worse with the current update as it did with its newfound inability to play a commercial radio stream from 1190KEX.com as previously reported?

Maybe you guys should get a little more free of the Microsoft model and start sending users a description of the update showing exactly what was fixed and why along with the source snippets to inspect and approve or disapprove if they want before downloading it.

ProblemType: Bug
Architecture: i386
Date: Wed Jul 11 09:44:42 2007
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 7.04
Package: firefox 2.0.0.4+1-0ubuntu1
PackageArchitecture: i386
SourcePackage: firefox
Uname: Linux kirk-ubuntu 2.6.20-16-generic #2 SMP Thu Jun 7 20:19:32 UTC 2007 i686 GNU/Linux

[John Vivirito (gnomefreak)]

how is this a firefox bug? we have changelogs of exactly what was changed and why http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/ you can always check on packages.ubuntu.com as well. As for being able to choose your updates what you want and what you dont want update-manager allows you to do this.
Please explain what you are looking for instead of multi listings that have nothing to do with firefox alone. If this is a ubuntu problem please let me know ill move it to right package. update-manager controls all updates when repos get newer version of packages not an app.

[John Vivirito (gnomefreak)]

Point of a stable release is it doesnt get anything but security updates. if you are getting others than disable 3rd party repos as well as backport repos.

[Kirk Fraser (overcomer-man)]

Thanks for the suggestion. How do I disable repos?

On 7/11/07, John Vivirito <email address hidden> wrote:
> Point of a stable release is it doesnt get anything but security
> updates. if you are getting others than disable 3rd party repos as well
> as backport repos.
>
> --
> No "No Updates" Choice
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/125283
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>

[John Vivirito (gnomefreak)]

open the sources.list by typing gksudo gedit /etc/apt/sources.list
than add a # to the front of the repo. than save and close than run sudo apt-get update.

[John Vivirito (gnomefreak)]

If you still think this bug needs to be looked at please explain yourself without jumping from issue to issue and assign to the correct package.
Thank you for your bug report.

[Alexander Sack (asac)]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 08:22:10AM -0000, John Vivirito wrote:
> open the sources.list by typing gksudo gedit /etc/apt/sources.list
> than add a # to the front of the repo. than save and close than run sudo apt-get update.
>

Remember that if you disable updates, you will end up with loads of
security issues that have public testcases/exploits avaialable. Its
your decision, but disabling security updates is just the wrong way to
go.

 - Alexander

[John Vivirito (gnomefreak)]

he shouldnt be disabling them as my comment was

"if you are getting others than disable 3rd party repos as well as backport repos."

[Kirk Fraser (overcomer-man)]

I was told Suse has this feature.

On 7/21/07, John Vivirito <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> he shouldnt be disabling them as my comment was
>
> "if you are getting others than disable 3rd party repos as well as
> backport repos."
>
> --
> No "No Updates" Choice
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/125283
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>

[John Vivirito (gnomefreak)]

Kirk maybe suse does have it but Ubuntu is no where near the same as Suse. We merge features and apps from Debian. Disabling 3rd party repos and backport repos is ablet o be done in Ubuntu. What exactly do you mean Suse has this feature? Ubuntu doesnt support packages/apps in 3rd party repos at all that is up to 3rd party repo maintainers (if that is what you meant.

[Kirk Fraser (overcomer-man)]

John,

> What exactly do you mean Suse has this feature?

I was at a Christian Game Developer's Conference in Portland last week and
saw one fellow who was running Suse on his laptop. I mentioned this thread
regarding Ubuntu updates. He said Suse is almost exactly the same as Ubuntu
and it allowed him to disable updates. He didn't show me how it was done,
so I assume it was part of the Suse setup.

That is exactly what I mean as I have zero personal experience with Suse. I
also have no idea what you mean by "repos" -- for me the term is associated
with collection agencies. In my opinion there should be a way to separate
ones' system from being part of the Ubuntu developer's testbed. I would be
happy to live with the original install of Ubuntu 7 until Ubuntu 8 is
released.

I moved from Ubuntu 6 to Ubuntu 7 when 6 was getting too buggy although I'm
not sure if the loss of features was due to updates or a virus. U7 has
acquired one bug I noticed due to updates. I simply want a guarantee of no
new bugs due to updates. Stopping updates is a guarantee. On the other
hand, the "expense" of feature loss vs. the "expense" of so much email
discussion about it is leading me to an "I don't care anymore" position on
the issue.

Kirk

On 7/23/07, John Vivirito <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Kirk maybe suse does have it but Ubuntu is no where near the same as
> Suse. We merge features and apps from Debian. Disabling 3rd party repos
> and backport repos is ablet o be done in Ubuntu. What exactly do you
> mean Suse has this feature? Ubuntu doesnt support packages/apps in 3rd
> party repos at all that is up to 3rd party repo maintainers (if that is
> what you meant.
>
> --
> No "No Updates" Choice
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/125283
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>

[Alexander Sack (asac)]

On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 04:22:29PM -0000, Kirk Fraser wrote:
> John,
>
> > What exactly do you mean Suse has this feature?
>
> I was at a Christian Game Developer's Conference in Portland last week and
> saw one fellow who was running Suse on his laptop. I mentioned this thread
> regarding Ubuntu updates. He said Suse is almost exactly the same as Ubuntu
> and it allowed him to disable updates. He didn't show me how it was done,
> so I assume it was part of the Suse setup.
>
> That is exactly what I mean as I have zero personal experience with Suse. I
> also have no idea what you mean by "repos" -- for me the term is associated
> with collection agencies. In my opinion there should be a way to separate
> ones' system from being part of the Ubuntu developer's testbed. I would be
> happy to live with the original install of Ubuntu 7 until Ubuntu 8 is
> released.
>
> I moved from Ubuntu 6 to Ubuntu 7 when 6 was getting too buggy although I'm
> not sure if the loss of features was due to updates or a virus. U7 has
> acquired one bug I noticed due to updates. I simply want a guarantee of no
> new bugs due to updates. Stopping updates is a guarantee. On the other
> hand, the "expense" of feature loss vs. the "expense" of so much email
> discussion about it is leading me to an "I don't care anymore" position on
> the issue.

Again, not updating your system when security updates are released
causes major security risk.

 - Alexander

[Kirk Fraser (overcomer-man)]

Again, I think the risk of not updating between Ubuntu 7 and Ubuntu 8 is not
significant. Therefore, perhaps you should quantify the risk if you are
going to continue claiming it is "major." How many hours can U 7 be
expected to run bug free with and without updates? I think that should be
the deciding factor for the general population of users, even though I
understand developers must constantly update for a variety of reasons.

Kirk

On 7/23/07, Alexander Sack <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 04:22:29PM -0000, Kirk Fraser wrote:
> > John,
> >
> > > What exactly do you mean Suse has this feature?
> >
> > I was at a Christian Game Developer's Conference in Portland last week
> and
> > saw one fellow who was running Suse on his laptop. I mentioned this
> thread
> > regarding Ubuntu updates. He said Suse is almost exactly the same as
> Ubuntu
> > and it allowed him to disable updates. He didn't show me how it was
> done,
> > so I assume it was part of the Suse setup.
> >
> > That is exactly what I mean as I have zero personal experience with
> Suse. I
> > also have no idea what you mean by "repos" -- for me the term is
> associated
> > with collection agencies. In my opinion there should be a way to
> separate
> > ones' system from being part of the Ubuntu developer's testbed. I would
> be
> > happy to live with the original install of Ubuntu 7 until Ubuntu 8 is
> > released.
> >
> > I moved from Ubuntu 6 to Ubuntu 7 when 6 was getting too buggy although
> I'm
> > not sure if the loss of features was due to updates or a virus. U7 has
> > acquired one bug I noticed due to updates. I simply want a guarantee of
> no
> > new bugs due to updates. Stopping updates is a guarantee. On the other
> > hand, the "expense" of feature loss vs. the "expense" of so much email
> > discussion about it is leading me to an "I don't care anymore" position
> on
> > the issue.
>
> Again, not updating your system when security updates are released
> causes major security risk.
>
> - Alexander
>
> --
> No "No Updates" Choice
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/125283
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>

[Alexander Sack (asac)]

On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 05:07:43PM -0000, Kirk Fraser wrote:
> Again, I think the risk of not updating between Ubuntu 7 and Ubuntu 8 is not
> significant. Therefore, perhaps you should quantify the risk if you are
> going to continue claiming it is "major." How many hours can U 7 be
> expected to run bug free with and without updates? I think that should be
> the deciding factor for the general population of users, even though I
> understand developers must constantly update for a variety of reasons.

its not about upgrading from 7 to 8 ... its about getting security
updates (e.g. you might read that as 7.x.x.0 to 7.x.x.1

 - Alexander

[Kirk Fraser (overcomer-man)]

Turning off updates in 7 so I get no updates until 8 seems like an
appropriate balance between the risk of being damaged by a security
violation and the risk of being damaged by a security update. If you think
otherwise, quantify.

Kirk

On 7/23/07, Alexander Sack <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 05:07:43PM -0000, Kirk Fraser wrote:
> > Again, I think the risk of not updating between Ubuntu 7 and Ubuntu 8 is
> not
> > significant. Therefore, perhaps you should quantify the risk if you are
> > going to continue claiming it is "major." How many hours can U 7 be
> > expected to run bug free with and without updates? I think that should
> be
> > the deciding factor for the general population of users, even though I
> > understand developers must constantly update for a variety of reasons.
>
> its not about upgrading from 7 to 8 ... its about getting security
> updates (e.g. you might read that as 7.x.x.0 to 7.x.x.1
>
> - Alexander
>
> --
> No "No Updates" Choice
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/125283
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>

[Alexander Sack (asac)]

On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 05:53:06PM -0000, Kirk Fraser wrote:
> Turning off updates in 7 so I get no updates until 8 seems like an
> appropriate balance between the risk of being damaged by a security
> violation and the risk of being damaged by a security update. If you think
> otherwise, quantify.

It is necessary, look at the firefox security advisories ... search
google 'mozilla security announce' ...

Thanks,

 - Alexander