On Wednesday 23 June 2010 20:32:34 Nathan Dorfman wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com
wrote:
Nathan Dorfman n...@rtfm.net wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:46 AM, jonas.diaz.1...@gmail.com wrote:
I think is very simple...that option can be added
I'm not sure how you can say I honestly cannot think of a single bug (even
security related) that would be so critical a user needs it on the hour
instead of once a day.
What would your reaction be if you were to learn that you had been
browsing the web for the past 12 hours with a remotely
On 23 June 2010 20:18, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
AIUI, it wouldn't help much on Ubuntu since by default u-m doesn't pop up
it's window for security updates if it's been opened in the last two days.
Why that may happen on Kubuntu, it hasn't been true on any post-Jaunty
Ubuntu
Loïc Martin loic.mart...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23 June 2010 20:18, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
AIUI, it wouldn't help much on Ubuntu since by default u-m doesn't pop up
it's window for security updates if it's been opened in the last two days.
Why that may happen on Kubuntu,
And there I was, thinking there was something wrong with my
recently-upgraded machine! Being a lazy dev, I just added a cron job to
apt-get update on the hour... So I get hourly checks, as per the original
thread, but this isn't exactly friendly for the average user ):
--
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 22:49 -0400, Nathan Dorfman wrote:
Personally, I would prefer it, and I think it's quite reasonable. Thoughts?
You have to remember that not everyone has broadband and not everyone
can download/upload that much. Checking hourly does add up to a lot of
network activity and
Keep in mind that checking for updates involves a non-trivial download
of package lists from all repositories the user is subscribed to.
Unfortunately, it is a much more intense operation than it appears.
AFAIK the download is only performed if the packages list was changed, if
the local
On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 08:07 +0100, Joao Pinto wrote:
Keep in mind that checking for updates involves a non-trivial
download
of package lists from all repositories the user is subscribed
to.
Unfortunately, it is a much more intense operation than it
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:43 AM, Shane Fagan
shanepatrickfa...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 22:49 -0400, Nathan Dorfman wrote:
Personally, I would prefer it, and I think it's quite reasonable. Thoughts?
You have to remember that not everyone has broadband and not everyone
can
Message-
From: Nathan Dorfman n...@rtfm.net
Sender: ubuntu-devel-discuss-boun...@lists.ubuntu.com
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 10:38:35
To: Shane Faganshanepatrickfa...@ubuntu.com
Cc: ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Subject: Re: Shouldn't update-manager's check for updates setting have
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:46 AM, jonas.diaz.1...@gmail.com wrote:
I think is very simple...that option can be added but not make it the default
choice, so anyone that can and want to activate it will be satisfied. We are
just making Ubuntu richer in users' options.
I agree. This is exactly
-manager's check for updates setting have an
hourly option?
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
Nathan Dorfman n...@rtfm.net wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:46 AM, jonas.diaz.1...@gmail.com wrote:
I think is very simple...that option can
Nathan Dorfman n...@rtfm.net wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
Nathan Dorfman n...@rtfm.net wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:46 AM, jonas.diaz.1...@gmail.com wrote:
I think is very simple...that option can be added but not make it the
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 4:25 PM, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
Nathan Dorfman n...@rtfm.net wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
Nathan Dorfman n...@rtfm.net wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:46 AM, jonas.diaz.1...@gmail.com
Personally, I would prefer it, and I think it's quite reasonable. Thoughts?
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
million machines hitting the update servers every hour. hm
On Jun 23, 2010, at 10:49 AM, Nathan Dorfman wrote:
Personally, I would prefer it, and I think it's quite reasonable. Thoughts?
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 7:49 PM, Nathan Dorfman n...@rtfm.net wrote:
Personally, I would prefer it, and I think it's quite reasonable. Thoughts?
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Dylan McCall dylanmcc...@gmail.com wrote:
Keep in mind that checking for updates involves a non-trivial download
of package lists from all repositories the user is subscribed to.
Unfortunately, it is a much more intense operation than it appears.
A fair
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 21:38, Nathan Dorfman n...@rtfm.net wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Dylan McCall dylanmcc...@gmail.com wrote:
Keep in mind that checking for updates involves a non-trivial download
of package lists from all repositories the user is subscribed to.
On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 00:38 -0400, Nathan Dorfman wrote:
A fair point, but I think that up to 24 hours without a critical
security update could be undesirable in some situations. Certainly, I
think the default should remain daily. For what it's worth, Fedora's
default is daily but it does
20 matches
Mail list logo
