Add option to allow "offline" updates for Flatpak packages, possibly AUR

Feedback Feature Request
25

I’ve heard this so many times, and I hate this quote so much.

Sure, the underlying system of a Linux OS is designed to be much more powerful. But we’re talking about the desktop use case. And in the desktop use case, everyone should be “friends” with the system. And again, the system should work for the user (especially in a desktop context), not the other way around.

To use your analogy, using any desktop OS should be like riding a taxi cab. Just as painless and easy to use. However, if you choose to use a terminal-only server OS, then you’re working on a racecar, with all the tinkering ability and power that brings.

26

Then let’s look at it from another perspective, i.e. that UNIX and MS-Windows are so fundamentally different under the hood that the strategies for updating MS-Windows don’t work too well with a UNIX-style system.

The plumbing and the wiring are too different. Does that properly convey what we mean?

27

I don’t even see the comparison with Windows as even relevant.

Systems that present themselves as being more user friendly (taxi cab) should take care of as much as is humanly possible for the user, leaving the user to do whatever tasks they wish to do.

28

Actually NO.

On a Steam device, then you would simply interact with the GUI and that’s it… this is a consumer facing immutable system.

There are immutable desktops which are similar - you can’t mess them up and aren’t responsible for maintenance.

There are inbetweenies - some stable systems (famously Linux Mint) which are possibly more ideal for shutdown updates - but it’s still a stinky option meaning you configure your systemctl update-on-shutdown service, but then you’re stuck with some annoying desktop message:

notify-send "System Update" "Running updates before shutdown..."

Haha familiar territory - you’re not allowed to turn off your computer now.

However, you’re right - we’re all experienced users and we all have really strange opinions. What you need to do is to conduct some proper research.

You must first target people who have no idea about Linux, get their vote, and then target those who have experience (like us) and get their vote.

As pointed out, for experienced users, it’s fairly trivial to set up systemd with timers to actually do this… but experienced users will pretty much always refuse to tack this activity on as something that will delay their shutdowns.

Ah, well that’s your mistake isn’t it?

Manjaro should specify exactly. For a start, can you define ‘user friendly’. Is this for Linux users, or Mobile Phone users?

For Linux users, Linux Mint is supposed to be ‘user friendly’ - go use that.

Manjaro is aimed to take some pain out of installing and using Arch software, to offer some tools to make the experience ‘more user friendly’.

So your question should be ‘more user - friendly than what?’.

2 Likes
29

The tools for doing what you want it to do are available, so use them as you see fit. :man_shrugging:

It would however be very selfish to demand that your preferred way of doing things should be forced upon everyone else. Not everyone has the same needs, the same preferences, or the same use cases. And with GNU/Linux (or UNIX in general) there is a much greater variety in that than in the event of one-size-fits-all devices like Android or iOS.

4 Likes
31

Okay, then tell me this. What is the purpose of the Manjaro paradigm of holding back packages compared to raw Arch upstream? Presumably (to me) that is for the benefit of Manjaro users, to ensure stable, safe updates for all users who are on the stable branch.

Is the “stable” branch not expected to be trouble free? If so, then stable doesn’t have enough testing. That’s the crux of the issue then.

Really systems in general are for the purpose of doing work, not just to have another thing for the user to take care of. Life has enough things for users to take care of.

A tool that needs constant tending to isn’t a great tool.

32

That’s why Microsoft started using the update on shutdown: because Updating on Windows is a PITA. While in fact Linux updating has never been like that. It has always been a case of “oh there’s some updates”… “I’ll start them running and go back to what I’ was doing”… “Oh that update requires a reboot, well it can wait till I’ve finished what I’m doing”.

While on Windows it was always “Damn I have to do an update”… “I better do it, otherwise it will nag me till I do, and I better wrap up what I’m doing, because I will be forced to reboot multiple times.”

So to mitigate the update reboot, more updating, reboot, finish updating reboot again, Microsoft introduced update on shut down.

That functionality adds nothing to the Linux experience, and it is only an expectation gained from using Windows that makes it look useful on Linux.

But, of course, it is optional, not required, and nor is the standard Linux update in place. So if it floats your boat do it, but you are unlikely to get any traction on the idea that adding flatpaks or AUR to it will improve the update process.

… and, of course Windows update update only Microsoft applications, and the System… All other applications have to be update individually.

5 Likes
33

Stabilization. But that’s for the Stable branch. The Testing branch sees far more frequent updates.

Bear in mind however that there is also the Summit branch, which is the immutable version of Manjaro. And that’s a whole other beast.

In theory, yes. In practice, no.

Well, then that’s your opinion, and I’m not saying it’s wrong, but then at the very same time, we’ve got the very vocal crowd who can never wait for The Latest & Greatest™, and who are bombarding us with feature requests in that regard.

You just can’t please everyone, and a line has to be drawn. :man_shrugging:

Then you should really look for a point-release distribution like Mint or Mageia, or the commercial offerings from RedHat or SUSE, or something like CentOS and siblings, because then a rolling-release distribution is not going to meet your needs. :man_shrugging:

1 Like
34

I say this since Manjaro is one of a few distros that as mentioned before is being pre-installed on machines available off the shelf to any old user, and Manjaro being marketed towards enterprise, where stability is definitely expected (see Manjaro website).

35

Not on that many machines. And this is pretty much what the Summit branch would be ideal for, but Summit is a work in progress — it’s a still fairly new addition to the Manjaro release model, and it’s not really ready for prime time yet.

Yes, but that too is unfortunately still a pipe dream at the moment. Again, this is what the Summit branch would be perfect for.

36

Hmm, then looks like I’d be interested in the summit branch.

Is there anywhere where I can read more about what the summit branch is expected to be?

37

Yes, there was an announcement thread about it. :point_down:

2 Likes
38

Language, again, is the barrier here.

Manjaro is a mountain, and mountains are stable. However, this is not the case.

Arch is our starting point, a rolling distribution which can be relatively reliable (which is NOT the same meaning as stable, though most people use ‘stable’ to mean ‘not crashing’) if properly cared for.

So Manjaro takes Arch, adds some stuff, and pushes this out as it’s first point - the Unstable first edition.

STABLE would mean it is fully vetted, and then it is FIXED for a long period of time. This is where immutable comes in - immutable isn’t ‘supposed to be stable’. It is solid as a rock, because it works and you can’t change it.

Think back to running old phones, like a Nokia N70. Turn it on and off, use it for a year - nothing changes, 100% stable.

The term ‘Stable’ in Manjaro releases means ‘relatively stable’ or ‘curated and judged stable enough for most folks’.

Don’t confuse this with your Router, which will run for years without instability.

1 Like
39

The number and frequency of updates, in my experience are about the same, as Manjaro Stable.

@viggy96, if you’ve come from a recent version of Windows, you probably have absolutely no idea what a PITA Windows updates were, and why the Linux update in place was such a breath of fresh air for those of us, who had to put up with Windows updates before they introduced update on shut down, or even why so many of us ‘old’ hands, see no utility in update on shut down on Linux.

The last Windows I used was Windows 7, and it was still the PITA update process. The only thing, that for me mediated that horrible update process, was the fact that I was running Windows in a VM, so I could do other things while it did it’s thing.

I know a lot of people here talk about running pacman or pamac (occasionally), but I do all my updates in pamac-manager. I set it off, and pretty much forget it, until it’s finished, and I get my repo apps, and the OS, the small number of flatpaks, and a couple of AUR apps.

While the update is happening I’m happily posting on here or uploading photos, or just carrying on with some programming. Linux updates make using my device a pleasure, and they have since I started using Linux in 2000.

That is exactly what I love about my Linux System, be it Manjaro, or any other I’ve used. It does. It doesn’t get in my way.

3 Likes
40

I don’t understand what’s with this obsession to make linux popular. People nowadays are so stupid they can’t operate a simple remote control and you’d like to see them using linux…well, linux bent every-which-way to suit their easy-to-operate logic.

Linux doesn’t need those users. We don’t need those users.

3 Likes
41

Actually update on shut down is one of the ways Linux has been bent to accommodate the Windows paradigm.

Linux is already easy to Operate, and many aspects of the Linux way make it so much more user friendly than Windows. The problem isn’t Linux being difficult, is Windows users expecting it to work the same broken way as Windows, because that is what they are used to.

3 Likes
42

Flatpaks can be updated in CLI before shutdown

flatpak update; shutdown

But it would seem more logical to me to update Flatpaks after system is booted
or use a systemd timer to check for updates independent of pamac for systems that are not rebooted very often

4 Likes
43

:wave:

Sometimes a feature from an Operating System will not work well with another Operating System.

An Operating System looks like a Vehicle, we need a bunch of tools to make it work. We can’t drive a car just by the tire, or just by the engine, a windshield and so on, but we can drive when all those parts are linked together (or almost). Linux Kernel looks like the engine and when properly linked together with all other parts (programs) turns into a fully Operating System or Distros.

But like vehicles, each Linux Distros (Manjaro, Mint, Ubuntu, Fedora, Arch, Gentoo…), Windows, Apple, Android, BSD, etc… have their own purpose. We can drive a Motorbike and/or a Car but we can’t park a Motorbike, hoping that it will not fall, if we don’t have the stand (kickstand) support. With the Car we can park without that tool (software). Can we install a kickstand on a Car? Yeah, but…
Also it is different to drive a Double-trailer (Twin Trailers) Truck in comparison with a Car. I think we will not use an empty Twin Trailers Truck just to travel to the beach on vacation, although we could do it.

So we need to choose our Vehicle (Operating System, Distros) according to our needings. If we like just to stop and let it be, don’t want to suffer with rainy days… we should use a Car, but we will need to make more maneuvers in comparison with a Motorbike. But if we want more quick maneuvers with more speed, then we should choose a Motorbike. If we want to load a lot of goodies, then the Truck will be the best choice.

And in the end we have popular vehicles, that most people drive, special vehicles, rare vehicles, “do it yourself” vehicles as we have popular operating systems, special operating systems, rare operating systems, “do it yourself” operating systems and so on…

It is upon us to choose what is best for us.

:vulcan_salute:

2 Likes
44

I do, but not at the expense of good practice. For example, I’ve seen folks who want to have a single centralised method of downloading and installing software; or to have more predictable defaults with fewer choices and less configuration… or to get rid of stupid chmod/chown/SELinux/AppArmor and have a more user friendly simple UAC-style prompt…

There are solid reasons to reject these urges…

Newcomers try to bend it into a Windows clone - adding desktop icons (I mean, even in 2015 that was messy and old-hat on Windows!!!).

These people would buy a full-bred classic racecar, then install airconditioning and cup-holders.

3 Likes
47

This is exactly the sentiment that needs to die off. There should be a solution for all users to be comfortable using Linux. As @Ben mentioned before, all of us here on this forum are experienced users, and those of us on this forum experience a selection bias of opinions only from other experienced users. OSes should be welcoming to all users, not just those who are already comfortable using the terminal etc.

I’ve used various versions of Windows since 98, including XP, Vista, 7, 10, and soon 11. I have a work laptop currently that runs Windows, and its more unreliable than my personal machines running Manjaro. I’m simply proposing yet another feature that would be helpful for the user.

And I’ve been using Linux for much of that time as well. Starting with Ubuntu (as many do), and finding my way to Manjaro in about 2018 or so.

Especially with regard to automatically updating flatpaks, which should be inherently safe, since they are isolated from system packages. Admittedly AUR would likely be dangerous to blanket allow automatic updates for, since they are not isolated from system packages (I mention this iin an earlier comment).

Possibly, but this is in a context where the “update system at shutdown” option exists, so it would be nice to lump flatpak with those updates, given that that option is there today.