Ubuntu advantage tools should be removable without breakage of the core system functionality

[Norbert]

On supported systems please allow users to remove ubuntu-advantage-tools package without harm for the system.

Currently simple below command `sudo apt autopurge ubuntu-advantage-tools` will ruin the system as follows

```
$ sudo apt autopurge ubuntu-advantage-tools
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following packages will be REMOVED:
  distro-info* python3-debconf* ubuntu-advantage-tools* ubuntu-mate-core* ubuntu-mate-desktop* ubuntu-minimal* ubuntu-release-upgrader-core*
  ubuntu-release-upgrader-gtk* update-manager* update-manager-core* update-notifier* update-notifier-common*
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 12 to remove and 41 not upgraded.
After this operation, 6 687 kB disk space will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] n
Abort.

```

This is not acceptable.

Please change package dependencies and/or make UA configurable.

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 20.04
Package: ubuntu-advantage-tools 27.2.2~20.04.1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 5.4.0-89.100-generic 5.4.143
Uname: Linux 5.4.0-89-generic x86_64
ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu27.21
Architecture: amd64
CasperMD5CheckResult: skip
CurrentDesktop: MATE
Date: Fri Nov 12 00:48:41 2021
InstallationDate: Installed on 2020-04-23 (567 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu-MATE 20.04 LTS "Focal Fossa" - Release amd64 (20200423)
SourcePackage: ubuntu-advantage-tools
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)

[Launchpad Janitor (janitor)]

Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.

[Lucas Albuquerque Medeiros de Moura (lamoura)]

Hi Norbert,

This happens because ubuntu-advantage-tools is a package dependency of the ubuntu-minimal metapackage. Although it is possible to change that from a Depends to a Recommends, we will need to have a broader discussion about it.

I suggest sending the request into this mailing list to see the broader opinion of the Ubuntu developers:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

Another thing we must take into consideration is that we need to also understand how update-manager is depending on ubuntu-advantage-tools and if we could also change the dependency there to Recommends.

But that can be also better discussed in the mailing list.

[Sebastián Salgado (cebas)]

I strongly agree on that all ubuntu advantage packages must be optional as the service is.
This smells like marketing driven to me...

[Robie Basak (racb)]

Previous discussion here: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-advantage-tools/+bug/1686183/comments/44

However I agree with Lucas. The decision has already been made, so it isn't helpful to track an "open" bug on it since there is no action to take in Ubuntu just because this bug is open. If you want to request that the decision be reconsidered, please use the mailing list as Lucas described above. In the meantime, the correct status for this bug is "Opinion".

[Robie Basak (racb)]

Ah - Lucas did already start an ML thread here: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2021-November/041688.html

[Robie Basak (racb)]

Anyone who wants this changed should participate in the thread. If nobody is prepared to make the case there, then this change is unlikely to happen.

[Timo Aaltonen (tjaalton)]

Just a drive-by comment, but regarding the size of the package in the old bug comment #44 it has surely grown a bit since.. the installed size is now 2.8MB, mainly caused by the apt-esm-json-hook library which itself is 2.2MB (on amd64).

[wontfix (wontfix)]

Just to add, the file listed at https://ubuntu.com/legal/motd to combat this package's "feature" since it cannot be removed, no longer exists in Jammy, 22.04.

[Norbert (nrbrtx)]

Still actual for the latest Ubuntu 22.04 LTS beta.

[Norbert (nrbrtx)]

Ubuntu 22.04 LTS final is still affected. Great! Thank you!

[Steve Langasek (vorlon)]

This bug was already closed 'opinion' once by the developers but has been reopened by the submitter. The developers asked that discussion about this decision be taken to the mailing list.

A release cycle and change later, this continues to come up in discussions, but the submitter of this bug has not participated on the mailing list thread to offer any arguments; so the Server Team has asked me to comment.

I have also posted my comment to the mailing list at https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2022-June/042115.html but am copying it here for the record.

The ubuntu-minimal metapackage defines the minimal experience that we consider to be "Ubuntu". It is possible to remove this metapackage from the system, from a packaging system / policy perspective this is permitted. However, by doing so, you are making the system "not Ubuntu" and you will not receive support for such a system from the Ubuntu community.

We have always taken an opinionated view on what defines the minimal "Ubuntu". For instance: at one point in the past, upstart was our supported init system, but there were other init system packages in the archive. It was possible to install these - but only by removing the ubuntu-minimal package. Requests to relax the dependency in order to allow other init
systems as an alternative were rejected, because that was not the defined Ubuntu experience.

We should always be willing to reconsider the contents of our minimal install based on technical considerations. To date, however, the objections I've seen to ubuntu-advantage-tools being a required minimal package have not been technical, but rather questions of taste: specifically, some people appear to find it distasteful that a paid service from Canonical is being
advertised without the ability to opt out.

Firstly, users are always entitled to their opinion when it comes to questions of taste; but the Ubuntu developers are not obligated to accomodate differences of taste when it comes to the Ubuntu experience.

But secondly, as I've commented before, the purpose of ubuntu-advantage-tools inclusion in ubuntu-minimal isn't to advertise
commercial services; it's to ensure users are informed regarding the security status of their systems, and to provide a clean user experience for enabling the ESM service - which in some contexts is a paid service, in some contexts not - to provide the best possible security for those systems.

There are two other issues that have come up in discussion around ubuntu-advantage-tools. Neither requires making the package removable in order to address, and ensuring they are addressed in the package itself improves the Ubuntu experience for all users, not just those that choose to remove this package.

 - https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1956115 objects about not being able to opt out of the MOTD messages. This bug report however is marked incomplete, as the behavior described does not appear to correspond to the default behavior in Ubuntu Desktop or Server. If there are problems being unable to opt out, we certainly want to address those.

 - ubuntu-advantage-tools is now a bit larger than it was originally, weighing in ...

[cracket (cracket)]

Thank you for your opinion, however problem is a little wider than you discussed. It impacts all systems which are based on Ubuntu as a derivative works and which I assume you call "unsupported", but which widely exist, have multiple users and were still compatible with Ubuntu ecosystem - the same way like Ubuntu is compatible with Debian, and based on plenty of Debian solutions. I understand that the business intention of this hostile technical decision is to make Ubuntu incompatible and less user configurable than it was possible before, due to focusing on corporate environment. This is obvious for me however it needs to be expressed clearly - Canonical sends non-corporate users and system modders big f...arewell, which also from marketing perspective will impact both Ubuntu&Canonical goodwill and reputation. No matter how you will justify enforcing bloatware within your experience model - you will face the same outcome as other companies (like Google with Android bloatware).
One more final remark - my systems were officially unsupported since the beginning, and many people spent time supporting your product either directly or indirectly. And due to this farewell decision Canonical will be unsupported now.

[mkoniecz (matkoniecz)]

Please, reconsider this.

This package now spams ads during basic system operations, such as
sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade

see https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-advantage-tools/+bug/1992026

(though I understand that it is unlikely to be possible as additional ad spam was likely done on orders of Canonical that in the end controls Ubuntu)

[Norbert (nrbrtx)]

I solved this bug by completely removal of Ubuntu on all my 10+ systems.
Currently I use Debian 11 with MATE desktop. Debian is fast and great!

[Steve Langasek (vorlon)]

On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 11:24:45PM -0000, mkoniecz wrote:
> Please, reconsider this.

> This package now spams ads during basic system operations, such as
> sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade

> see https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-advantage-
> tools/+bug/1992026

> (though I understand that it is unlikely to be possible as additional ad
> spam was likely done on orders of Canonical that in the end controls
> Ubuntu)

This is a default, but is configurable. The interface for disabling this
is:

  sudo pro config set apt_news=false

[Byron (byron-goodman)]

This is annoying. Once our subscription for our servers at work run out, I'm moving them to FreeBSD. We only purchased support for just-in-case, break glass, and I thought I was helping support Ubuntu. But not with this in your face stuff.

I'm going to move my personal workstation to Debian.

[Goth Queen (artistbraab)]

I'm afraid I have to agree with the other users here, having just run an update cycle on various 22.04.1 LTS boxen and seen all sorts of so-called ubuntu-advantage-* applications scroll by.

I do strongly disagree with Steve Langasek (vorlon) who wrote on 2022-06-03:
"But secondly, as I've commented before, the purpose of ubuntu-advantage-tools inclusion in ubuntu-minimal isn't to advertise commercial services;"

This is rather surprising since I can not come to any other conclusion than that the Ubuntu Pro service is a commercial one (https://ubuntu.com/pro), and the only genuine dependency for ubuntu-advantage-* seems to be this commercial Canonical service.
Now, one could argue that the current configuration does not force the user to use Ubuntu Pro, and does not present a deliberate lock-in situation (yet), forcing the user to make certain choices preferable only to Canonical (as before with Amazon, snap).

One could also conclude that the stringent definition of non-essential dependencies is an action we are familiar with from other non-open operating systems, but, more importantly, might go against the open software nature and licenses linux systems are based on. As are, as someone else here remarked, the distros that are Ubuntu based, and who might need to reconsider their situation and options. As some already have strongly (Mint).

I personally am most likely not the person to have this discussion. As many users, I will act reluctantly when annoyance becomes too great, or interference becomes too crippling, putting the Ubuntu used, freely available FOSS together myself as I think Canonical should have done. Having said this however, I also think Canonicals brand (if we are talking commercial anyway) might benefit from open, honest, and correct communication with their users/ customers. Something that their corporate brand seems to have lost already with similar incidents previously...

[Ryan Lath (ryanlath)]

This is so obviously spam. All I wanted was the package update reminders... not this crap:
```
* Introducing Expanded Security Maintenance for Applications.
   Receive updates to over 25,000 software packages with your
   Ubuntu Pro subscription. Free for personal use.

     https://ubuntu.com/pro
```

[Michael (3-ueuntu-4)]

After killing the classic PXE boot image at the beta/rc-stage(!!!) of 20.04 for no reason and introducing this sh*t, I'll switch to debian soon - after 17 years. Bonus: No forces snap anymore.

Adding this crap surprisingly on a LTS(!) version is a no-go which damages a lot of confidence. And confidence is the most important value for an open source operating system.

Hints:
  * https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/344408/migrate-from-ubuntu-to-debian-and-take-the-application-data-along
  * (german) https://www.forum64.de/index.php?thread/134676-crossgrade-von-lubuntu-nach-debian/

[David Megginson (david-megginson)]

I agree that it's hard to defend this as a required part of a "minimal" Ubuntu installation, except from a marketing PoV (Canonical wants to make sure users see the ads). I understand that it's Canonical's choice in the end, but at least be honest about it instead of insulting us with posting far-fetched technical pseudo-explanations.

[Bill Miller (wbmilleriii)]

I also switched to Debian on our desktops because of this and the other changes forced on Ubuntu users without easy opt-out choices, snap being the other bad example. I still have a couple of Ubuntu servers but not for long.