6:26 p.m.
So I reported this bug back in October 2012, but it has had zero
attention paid:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863592
it seems like kind of a significant bug, and it got into the release of
F18, and it's still in F19. Is anyone ever going to get around to
dealing with it?
The problem is that the "Important updates are available" notification
launches the *online* update tool. If our story is that offline updates
are the Way To Go for 'normal' users - which is certainly what
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/OfflineSystemUpdates seems to be
saying - then that's inconsistent. It seems like once the 'Install
updates and restart' bit was done people just kinda figured the feature
was done, without considering how interaction with gnome-pk should be
handled. Note the item "Update gnome-packagekit to support offline
updates" under 'Scope' is not marked as 'done', but the feature is
listed as 100% complete.
There's an implication on the feature page that there should be a
distinction drawn between updates of 'OS components' (which should be
offline) and 'application updates and installations' (which should still
be possible online), but there's no indication this has actually been
implemented, and in my testing, the update notification pops up and
calls gnome-packagekit even when the update package set contains the
kernel, or systemd, or anything like that.
It just seems like the intersection between gnome-pk and offline updates
isn't really done yet, and needs to get finished off...
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
11:27 a.m.
Hi Adam,
Thanks for drawing attention to this. I personally often feel drowned
by Bugzilla, especially after ABRT's automated entries, and I wish we
had an ongoing manually maintained list of issues like this that are
high profile, hardware independent, etc.
On Fri, 2013-04-05 at 16:26 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
There's an implication on the feature page that there should be a
distinction drawn between updates of 'OS components' (which should be
offline) and 'application updates and installations' (which should still
be possible online), but there's no indication this has actually been
implemented, and in my testing, the update notification pops up and
calls gnome-packagekit even when the update package set contains the
kernel, or systemd, or anything like that.
Right. As far as I know the current UI mockups center around what
gnome-software is attempting to implement. Lots to do here obviously to
enable gnome-software; for example there's the bug that was discussed
here regarding the icon data last month (
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488968 ).
But we probably don't need to block on that; something stupid like by
doing:
diff --git a/plugins/updates/gsd-updates-manager.c
b/plugins/updates/gsd-updates-manager.c
index bb242ab..02a7d30 100644
--- a/plugins/updates/gsd-updates-manager.c
+++ b/plugins/updates/gsd-updates-manager.c
@@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ libnotify_action_cb (NotifyNotification *notification,
goto out;
}
if (g_strcmp0 (action, "show-update-viewer") == 0) {
- ret = g_spawn_command_line_async (BINDIR "/gpk-update-viewer",
+ ret = g_spawn_command_line_async (BINDIR "/gnome-software",
&error);
if (!ret) {
g_warning ("Failure launching update viewer: %s",
and ensuring gnome-software puts everything in the "OS update" box (to
update offline) would get us to a saner place, from which further
iteration is possible.
10:06 p.m.
On 08/04/13 09:27 AM, Colin Walters wrote:
Hi Adam,
Thanks for drawing attention to this. I personally often feel drowned
by Bugzilla, especially after ABRT's automated entries, and I wish we
had an ongoing manually maintained list of issues like this that are
high profile, hardware independent, etc.
Sadly, we don't really have the resources to make any kind of
appreciable dent in bug triage :/
On Fri, 2013-04-05 at 16:26 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> There's an implication on the feature page that there should be a
> distinction drawn between updates of 'OS components' (which should be
> offline) and 'application updates and installations' (which should still
> be possible online), but there's no indication this has actually been
> implemented, and in my testing, the update notification pops up and
> calls gnome-packagekit even when the update package set contains the
> kernel, or systemd, or anything like that.
Right. As far as I know the current UI mockups center around what
gnome-software is attempting to implement. Lots to do here obviously to
enable gnome-software; for example there's the bug that was discussed
here regarding the icon data last month (
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488968 ).
But we probably don't need to block on that; something stupid like by
doing:
diff --git a/plugins/updates/gsd-updates-manager.c
b/plugins/updates/gsd-updates-manager.c
index bb242ab..02a7d30 100644
--- a/plugins/updates/gsd-updates-manager.c
+++ b/plugins/updates/gsd-updates-manager.c
@@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ libnotify_action_cb (NotifyNotification *notification,
goto out;
}
if (g_strcmp0 (action, "show-update-viewer") == 0) {
- ret = g_spawn_command_line_async (BINDIR
"/gpk-update-viewer",
+ ret = g_spawn_command_line_async (BINDIR "/gnome-software",
&error);
if (!ret) {
g_warning ("Failure launching update viewer: %s",
and ensuring gnome-software puts everything in the "OS update" box (to
update offline) would get us to a saner place, from which further
iteration is possible.
Right, it seems like something that could be improved in the short term
quite appreciably by fairly simple hacks. Anything that doesn't result
in the online update app showing up would help, really.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
3:14 a.m.
Thanks for drawing attention to this. I personally often feel
drowned
by Bugzilla, especially after ABRT's automated entries, and I wish we
had an ongoing manually maintained list of issues like this that are
high profile, hardware independent, etc.
I apply a filter to filter them out so I have three views in BZ, abrt,
no abrt and the kitchen sink. It helps me to see what bugs are filed
outside of the abrt automated firehose.
Peter
On Fri, 2013-04-05 at 16:26 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> There's an implication on the feature page that there should be a
> distinction drawn between updates of 'OS components' (which should be
> offline) and 'application updates and installations' (which should still
> be possible online), but there's no indication this has actually been
> implemented, and in my testing, the update notification pops up and
> calls gnome-packagekit even when the update package set contains the
> kernel, or systemd, or anything like that.
Right. As far as I know the current UI mockups center around what
gnome-software is attempting to implement. Lots to do here obviously to
enable gnome-software; for example there's the bug that was discussed
here regarding the icon data last month (
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488968 ).
But we probably don't need to block on that; something stupid like by
doing:
diff --git a/plugins/updates/gsd-updates-manager.c
b/plugins/updates/gsd-updates-manager.c
index bb242ab..02a7d30 100644
--- a/plugins/updates/gsd-updates-manager.c
+++ b/plugins/updates/gsd-updates-manager.c
@@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ libnotify_action_cb (NotifyNotification *notification,
goto out;
}
if (g_strcmp0 (action, "show-update-viewer") == 0) {
- ret = g_spawn_command_line_async (BINDIR
"/gpk-update-viewer",
+ ret = g_spawn_command_line_async (BINDIR "/gnome-software",
&error);
if (!ret) {
g_warning ("Failure launching update viewer: %s",
and ensuring gnome-software puts everything in the "OS update" box (to
update offline) would get us to a saner place, from which further
iteration is possible.
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
3:16 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
Hi Adam,
Thanks for drawing attention to this. I personally often feel drowned
by Bugzilla, especially after ABRT's automated entries, and I wish we
had an ongoing manually maintained list of issues like this that are
high profile, hardware independent, etc.
At least for ABRT, we now have a very nice tool to check high profile &
hot automated bugs [1]. So I'd say it's "safe" to filter ABRT bugs
based
on these hot problems.
[1] https://retrace.fedoraproject.org/faf/problems/hot/
3:35 a.m.
On 6 April 2013 00:26, Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Not zero attention. It's just hard to solve. I've been talking to the
designers, but need mockups on what the UI should look like.
It just seems like the intersection between gnome-pk and offline
updates
isn't really done yet, and needs to get finished off...
Right, agreed. Poke me on irc "hughsie" if you can help design some
wireframes or tell me what needs to be done.
Richard.
4:46 p.m.
On 09/04/13 01:35 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 6 April 2013 00:26, Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863592
Not zero attention. It's just hard to solve. I've been talking to the
designers, but need mockups on what the UI should look like.
> It just seems like the intersection between gnome-pk and offline updates
> isn't really done yet, and needs to get finished off...
Right, agreed. Poke me on irc "hughsie" if you can help design some
wireframes or tell me what needs to be done.
I don't think I'm the best guy to help with a final design, I was
thinking more along the lines of short-term stuff like 'just make
clicking the notification trigger the "install updates and restart"
action with a confirmation dialog' or something like that. Glad to hear
you've been working on it, but I couldn't tell that from the bug trackers :)
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
10:36 a.m.
...
> Not zero attention. It's just hard to solve. I've been
talking to the
> designers, but need mockups on what the UI should look like.
>
>> It just seems like the intersection between gnome-pk and offline updates
>> isn't really done yet, and needs to get finished off...
...
I don't think I'm the best guy to help with a final design, I
was thinking
more along the lines of short-term stuff like 'just make clicking the
notification trigger the "install updates and restart" action with a
confirmation dialog' or something like that. Glad to hear you've been
working on it, but I couldn't tell that from the bug trackers :)
We do have some mockups [1] for this already, but they assume the
presence of the new Software application. The same workflow might be
possible with the existing pieces though.
Some points here:
1. The notification should only be displayed once the updates have
been silently downloaded in the background - it isn't a notification
that updates are available, but that they are ready to be installed.
2. We should always install system updates offline - having online
and offline for them seems odd and inconsistent.
3. We might also want to consider reminders. I'm not sure if there
have been discussions about this already, but showing a notification
on a daily basis seems about right.
I'm keen to see this fixed too, and actually filed a bug about it
upstream [2]. If there are any outstanding design questions, feel free
to ask and we will work it out.
Allan
[1] https://live.gnome.org/GnomeOS/Design/Whiteboards/SoftwareUpdates#Tentati...
[2] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=692146
4026
days inactive
4038
days old
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
7 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Adam Williamson -
Allan Day -
Colin Walters -
Jaroslav Reznik -
Peter Robinson -
Richard Hughes