KDE Discover gets update to prevent you breaking your Linux system

c) This talk of gatekeeping is utter crap. GNU/Linux is for everybody, that's the point. However, it's important to note that not every distro is for everybody. There are more experienced people who want to break, and want to learn, and make their system work their way. There are people who just want to click "go". And there's a whole range in-between. Which makes "improve" extremely subjective, which is a problem in and of itself.

Um, but Beamboom is literally and specifically saying that nobody who wants to just click "go" should be using Linux. At all. Ever. Beamboom is literally saying that Linux should not only remain used by only a minority on the desktop, but specifying just who that minority should be allowed to be (and I'm not a member, incidentally--it appears people like me should be banished to Windows or MacOS). I don't see how you can not call that gatekeeping.

So I'd say the gatekeeping is utter crap, not the talk of gatekeeping. And yes, I'm going to get "hot under the collar" when I'm told that people like me shouldn't have been allowed in the club. So are you telling me I should shut up and let myself be gatekept?


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 20 November 2021 at 10:20 pm UTC

I haven't said anything in a long time, but i am really "pissed" off what is currently happening. If i wanted a os which takes my hand and makes assumptions or decissions for me i would have stayed with windows or mac os ...

There is an override switch.

It's not making assumptions or decisions for you. It simply has a protection to prevent removing system critical packages by accident.

No one is taking anything away from you. apt is simply being made more newbie friendly. You can still break your system as much as you want.

More newbie friendly or for me another fucking option i need to remember and which because it should be newbie friendly won't be easy to find again (once in a blue moon when i am in charge of a debian based system) .... Specially ubuntu has been developed to a hell of a package management ...

You don't update snap -> oh the gui tool breaks because it tries to update snaps first. Oh after you got down and notice you need a new snap version you finally can now update the package ... synaptic using apt-get ... apt-get using apt .... which tool will give you now the option ? will they all be adapted or will because we are newbe friendly only that one hidden switch for apt (lowest level) be able to do what i want ? Also why did kde adapt something which clearly belongs into the hand of package management ? And does synaptic now do the same or whatever gui package manager you use ?

Perhaps you should refrain from posting again. Because this all sounds like ... well "unsubstantial ranting". First Snap. Since when do you update snaps by yourself? Granted you can, but by default they are updated autonomously and will never, ever conflict with your deb-packages (that's after all one of their selling points). Then you have synaptic (my favorite package manager) which does nothing else than provide a gui frontend for apt-*. And apt-get doesn't invoke apt, apt is just a "better apt-get". And yes it doesn't matter whether you use apt, apt-get, aptitude, synaptic or Gnome Software - they always use the same repos and they always install/uninstall or update the same packages.

Besides: Pretty much all distros nowadays prevent you from executing a sudo rm -fr / May I ask why? Legend has it that it was introduced because too many "elitist" found it oh so funny to troll newbies with this command...

no thats no unsubstantial ranting -> ... ubuntu 20.04 got into an update loop with the gui where basically they tried to update snaps and broke on a download error ... that prevented the apt part to update snap or in other words prevented the whole pc to update. fixed by an command line -> apt-get update / apt-get upgrade and after let the gui update the snaps

second ... the hplip driver which is need for the 179fwg which is currently needed from hp is broken. I guess for some python-dbus update (i was to lazy to figure it all out) changed to wlan setup instead of usb.

i won't try if a sudo rm -rf /* is catched on my distribution , cause i am 90% sure it isn't and i am to lazy to do so at least it works perfectly fine without a warning on subdirs ;)


Last edited by Glog78 on 20 November 2021 at 10:36 pm UTC

a) actually the gui initially forbid the removal of packages. It was doing exactly what you would like it to do. He had to bypass that - and without any other change, would the new changes to apt avoid what was done? If something is to improve, I would suggest a discussion around how to improve it, because I see the apt change (whatever your stance) as not actually solving anything.

To be honest, I don't know just what the GUI's error message was and haven't thought about how it should have been instead. Everyone seems mainly exercised about the change to apt. Which I agree was done hastily and may or may not be the best change that could have been done . . . I just don't see that it matters enough for anyone to be getting in an uproar about it. The new approach versus the old is a distinction with little practical difference. I don't frankly think that anyone objecting has arrived at their position because they really don't like the way apt works now for that bizarre little corner case, they just don't like thinking that a change, any change, got done because some know-nothing bigshot had troubles. And if they'd say that I might have some sympathy for that general point.

b) breakage is not desired, but....literally a thing nobody should ever do? Actually, no, it's absolutely a thing people might want to do (yes, I've wanted to do so before myself). My system, my choice.

Uh, breakage in general or this particular thing? I think you're very emphatically sidestepping my point. I was making a specific point about the specific rarity to nonexistence of people wanting to break their system in this particular way (and hence the unimportance to would-be breakers of changing this particular thing) . . . because to accomplish that breakage you would be using a different method. Anyway, if you use Gentoo, you can't break your system using apt in the first place, so what are you talking about?

Um, but Beamboom is literally and specifically saying that nobody who wants to just click "go" should be using Linux. At all. Ever.

Literally? And specifically? Well then, please quote me. It should be very easy to find those quotes, since that's what I am literally saying.

What I do say, is that those who do intend to use Linux should be willing to learn it for what it is. They should have the mindset and attitude of wanting to learn a new operating system. And they should be made aware of what Linux is.

I don't want to keep anyone from using or wanting to use Linux. But they should approach on Linux' premises, and yes - they might screw up in the process.
Linux is a much more open, modular system than the other two. The users must relate to that. They should use Linux for what it IS - and it is not just some political statement, a rage against the establishment. It's not a toy to pose with, a symbol.
It is a a very unique platform with a lot that separates it from the other two OSes. By comparison it is an exceptionally fragmented and complex landscape.

Just the mere fact that there's several different audio architectures on Linux! That does almost the same for most users, only not exactly and in different ways! Just to pull out but one small example. We all could make a list with examples like that.

Beamboom is literally saying that Linux should not only remain used by only a minority on the desktop, but specifying just who that minority should be allowed to be

Again: Nonsense. I am saying that Linux will never be the major mainstream desktop OS because of what it is. Just like a system camera is not for everyone, Linux is not for everyone. But if someone wants to learn to use a system camera - go right ahead! Just don't expect it to be used like a pocket camera - nor should they TRY to!

And yes, I'm going to get "hot under the collar" when I'm told that people like me shouldn't have been allowed in the club.

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. You need to cool your collar her :) . Nobody here tells you so.


Last edited by Beamboom on 20 November 2021 at 11:52 pm UTC

Ummmmmm

Y'all know you can turn the safety net off right?

Like it looks like it could be a command line option, or you could put it in the apt conf file.


It's not even a big deal. I mean the most we'd have to do is Google it when we run that issue.

Ummmmmm

Y'all know you can turn the safety net off right?

Like it looks like it could be a command line option, or you could put it in the apt conf file.


It's not even a big deal. I mean the most we'd have to do is Google it when we run that issue.

but isn't exactly this what linus did -> turn of the safety net by going to the commandline and even ignoring the warnings there ?
How do you want prevent people from googling and doing still what they are not meant to do ?

There is a tiny little warning blended in with all the other white noise on the screen, and blaming Linus is just silly.

TINY? lol - dude, there's TWO explicit warnings, very clearly put, AND info on what exact packages are about to be installed, AND you're asked to type a bloody SENTENCE to get through with it.
If that ain't clear enough then you're not really mature to use a system that gives you full control.

With great powers comes great responsibilities - and that goes for the package managers too. Most definitely.

But if you're after a OS that completely PADS you inside a fuzzy box where you can do nothing to harm you - well then Linux is not, was never and hopefully never will be your right choice.

It's a real shame to see such elitist nonsense being posted here. It's techno jargon in the errors, crammed around lots of overloading info that even "power users" screw up on. There is a reason why the term "sane defaults" even exists. Unless we want Linux on the desktop to continue to be gated by zealots and remain irrelevant, we have to appeal to users who don't have the time and patience to relearn every single thing and study all error messages, just to stop their system breaking.

Nah, this time I strongly believe you are wrong, Liam.

The text was clearly indicating that they were ESSENTIAL packages, if a person doesn't understand a term, in this case what “essential” means, then that person should look that term in a dictionary.

YES, Mr. Sebastian was affected by a flaw in the Linux system that should be fixed (and it is not about APT at all), but also, YES, the youtuber has responsibility in what happened too.

Ummmmmm

Y'all know you can turn the safety net off right?

Like it looks like it could be a command line option, or you could put it in the apt conf file.


It's not even a big deal. I mean the most we'd have to do is Google it when we run that issue.

but isn't exactly this what linus did -> turn of the safety net by going to the commandline and even ignoring the warnings there ?
How do you want prevent people from googling and doing still what they are not meant to do ?

It's an open source OS. You can do anything with it, even change the source to remove any safety net. While nothing will prevent that, I don't find it unreasonable to make it a little harder to nuke your system from the UI, especially for a program that gets a lot of user attention and use and so powerful/integral to the OS.

But if it's that oppressive, you can turn it off, just like the others. I can foresee doing that myself in some cases.

Come to think of that, I'm genuinely curious; What other safety nets do you turn off on your system?


I think mine are all on, the number of times apt has saved me be refusing to overwrite conf files in /etc is high.


Edit: sorry my spelling is horrible and apparently I can't complete a sentence today.

Edit: ahhh it's worse Everytime I read it!!!


Last edited by denyasis on 20 November 2021 at 11:29 pm UTC

I have to disagree with your definition of what GNU/Linux is. It doesn't have to be not so easy for people who only know Windows.

On a very fundamental level I would argue it is. Because they won't live in a bubble with just that one distro they have chosen and the eco system around it.

They will read, hear, get confused and distracted by all those other distros and alternative technologies related to Linux out there. Just take a look at any Linux user group on any social media platform. Those users will eventually join a handful of those. Look at the advice and claims posted there. Suddenly you need a special distro if you're gonna produce music. Or if you're gonna do this - or that. Not to mention the endless discussions about what is the best Linux gaming distro.

Shit like that matters - and it confuses the hell out of anyone not yet proficient enough on Linux to ignore all that nonsense.

And that's just the user groups!

All in all, they WILL soon enough be force fed the complexity and quite unstructured reality of Linux. This is just how it is. And this will not change!

But again, different distros for different people.

If this was one distro making a fork of apt with their own mechanics, I'd just shrug my shoulders and just say, "cool enough but not for me" and proceed.

But when they make changes to the Debian package system they make changes on one of the major package management systems on the entire Linux eco system. An enormous amount of distros. It will affect all use cases there is that runs on a Debian derivative.
And that's when I say, "hold your horses, we don't do that shit because of one broken Steam package and a youtubers ignorance".


Last edited by Beamboom on 20 November 2021 at 11:47 pm UTC

I have no use for this software, but it's probably good that it's getting some idiot-proofing ahead of the Deck launch (even if Valve are protecting the base OS image and using overlays, reducing the risk that dumb users pose to themselves...)

its not dumb users, its newbies, and everyone start as an newbie.
unless you are an linux user
https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/21664/dwarf-fortress-learning-curve

its like the dwarf fortress learning curve in this xkcd comic.


Last edited by elmapul on 20 November 2021 at 11:39 pm UTC

I don't want to dumb down Linux for less inexperienced users, but Pop OS or Ubuntu are not good distros for beginners, Linux Mint is because it's made by people who know what they're doing.

You have two companies like System 76 and Canonical behind these distros and there's still so many bugs and issues with them. I would never recommend any GNOME based distro to any beginner, what a joke. Anyone who recommends these distros to beginners has no idea what they're talking about.

Just recommend Linux Mint, that's it.

There was this dumb shift from the community that Pop OS was the new defacto beginner distro and that was a huge mistake IMO. I heard that the developers of Pop OS want to move away from GNOME about time, GNOME3 needs to just die, fork off GNOME2 like Cinnamon did or just make something else. GNOME3 is a catastrophe and needs to be abandoned, and we need new toolkits to replace GTK so we no longer rely in anyway on the abomination that is the GNOME team. They are the worst thing to have ever happened to Linux IMO.

Ummmmmm

Y'all know you can turn the safety net off right?

Like it looks like it could be a command line option, or you could put it in the apt conf file.


It's not even a big deal. I mean the most we'd have to do is Google it when we run that issue.

but isn't exactly this what linus did -> turn of the safety net by going to the commandline and even ignoring the warnings there ?
How do you want prevent people from googling and doing still what they are not meant to do ?

It's an open source OS. You can do anything with it, even change the source to remove any safety net. While nothing will prevent that, I don't find it unreasonable to make it a little harder to nuke your system from the UI, especially for a program that gets a lot of user attention and use and so powerful/integral to the OS.

But if it's that oppressive, you can turn it off, just like the others. I can foresee doing myself that in some cases.

Come to think of that, I'm genuinely curious; What other safety nets do you turn off on your system?

I think mine are all on, the number of times apt has saved me be refusing to overwrite conf files in /etc is high.


Edit: sorry my spelling is horrible and apparently I can't complete a sentence today.

Since i use arch on my machine , there is no real default "net". But on pc's i only administrate (eg: my mom's one with an ubuntu) i let it be as default as possible. But if default even on an lts version breaks stuff -> i give up on saying there is a good way to prevent things from breaking. Neither the changes on apt nor the changes on discovery nor any other changes will prevent things from breaking. That's my personal truth noone want to hear.

So my conclusion is not to make it harder or change anything (let people learn, let people understand , let people do their mistakes) but give them a much easier way to go back to a usable state. On windows it should be still F5 during bootup and go to last known working configuration or failasafe configuration.

Why don't we have those options (specially since they most likely can be easy implemented -> snapshots) on mainstream distributions ?

Why are people still be able to break systems when even android has a recovery solution ?

Why do we discuss solutions which are either force one group or the other group to change how they work ?

Why do people measure with different indicators what is newbie friendly and what makes me more angry ... why do they change this even within minutes?

Also what does really help and what doesn't? Or is current activism just something we use as an excuse?

As i wrote into my introduction -> if we really want to create newbie friendly distributions ... tools like proton-ge / protontricks / mangohud / vkbasalt and many more we are used to advice in the gaming community need to be marked at least as advanced technology if not marked as professional technology. They are far from being easy to use / configure or maintained -> even we have made big progess. But we also watch them with our years long knowledge about linux.

We can't say that lutris is a solution if basically nearly no distributions provides the maximum compatibility libraries for lutris. It's totally understandable why they don't (aka copyright's) but hey it differs totally from distribution to distribution (gstreamer plugins)....

Don't let me get into all the hassle you have if you want to have 32bit compatibility currently ...

This is all far from understandable for a normal windows user let alone a newbie.... And this is what sucks about all of this. We are not discussion the roots / the real problems but we fix something to get out of the focus. Does this really help linux? Does this make it easier for a none tech guy to get into linux? Also one question -> do we really want to have none tech guys into linux? What makes linux linux and not a windows clone? What is the reason why alot of us did switch and why do we love it? Do we love it for it's hand holding or do we love it for it's freedom?

I can say i have my answer and i don't agree with modern linux systems getting more and more uncontrollable or even understandable...
How many people still do understand which config file is to change (the systemd one or the etc one or mabye both ?)
How many people still do understand if a snap / flatpak can access a file or not ?
How many people understand why they can watch a wmv using their media player on linux but can't watch it in proton ?
How many people do understand that steam uses a container and while wine can access default shaders in /usr ... steam can't and more so how to diagnose this?
With soon to be 3 dx9 layers for wine (opengl / zink - gallium / dxvk) which one is to be used when ?

This is what we need to reduce , complexity -> it needs to be easy and default. And if something happen we need to go back easy to an default working system. But that's only my personal opinion. And as you can see above -> if i don't cheer for the current solution i am elitist -> or have unsustainable opinion and should be quiet. I know why i haven't said anything for years.

Um, but Beamboom is literally and specifically saying that nobody who wants to just click "go" should be using Linux. At all. Ever.

Literally? And specifically? Well then, please quote me. It should be very easy to find those quotes, since that's what I am literally saying.

You led off with "I simply do not subscribe to the idea of "Linux for everyone"". Then you started talking about all the "everyone" it was not for, and I recognized myself among them. Going further, describing who shouldn't be using Linux, you compared Linux to a specialized racing car, meaning Linux was only for the few, the proud, the race car drivers of OS users. I am not one of those, so that lets me out.

What I do say, is that those who do intend to use Linux should be willing to learn it for what it is. They should have the mindset and attitude of wanting to learn a new operating system.

You realize those two things are mutually exclusive, right? Wanting to just click "go" does not involve wanting to "learn an operating system" (whatever that even means), let alone get the experience of breaking the system and becoming somehow wiser from doing so.
Well I don't, and didn't when I started using it, have the mindset and attitude of wanting to learn a new operating system. I had the mindset and attitude of wanting to do word processing, browse the web, listen to music etc. on a system other than Windows. At times this meant it sucked to be me . . . not so much any more, and I like it that way, thanks.

And they should be made aware of what Linux is.

What you think it is. What you think it is, isn't what I think it is. So, since I don't want to assimilate what you think it is, and I don't want to approach it on the basis that you think I should be approaching it . . . you are saying that I am among that vast majority who shouldn't be using Linux.

I don't want to keep anyone from using or wanting to use Linux. But they should approach on Linux' premises, and yes - they might screw up in the process.

So . . . if you want the condition for people using linux to be (X), but you don't want to keep anyone from using Linux, what do you want? A mandatory re-education program for everyone beginning Linux use, so by the time they're really using it they have become the kind of people you want using Linux, with the kind of attitude you want them to have when using it?
How do you get from "I think people using Linux should be like X or do it like X" to "but I don't want to stop anyone"? You want people who don't do it your way to use Linux, you just get to disapprove of them? Except Linux "isn't for everyone", so they have to be the people Linux isn't for. How do you resolve the contradiction you're creating here?

Linux is a much more open, modular system than the other two. The users must relate to that.

You know, I almost hate to tell you, but modern non-hard-core Linux distributions are very easy to use. Nearly everything Just Works, software is much easier to install than in Windows, software updates are much less of a pain than in Windows, the system doesn't nag you meaninglessly all the time like Windows. Using Mint, you don't have to relate to a goddamn thing except assimilating that you can use the incredibly easy software installation GUI and then have the system keep that software updated, instead of having to browse the web for a bunch of stuff and install it one by one and maintain it yourself.

They should use Linux for what it IS - and it is not just some political statement against the establishment. It's not just a toy pose by, a symbol.

Hey, you're the one who seems to believe there is no possible practical reason to use Linux except if you want it to break. Although personally, I think political statements against the establishment are perfectly good reasons to do things.

Just the mere fact that there's several different audio architectures on Linux! That does almost the same for most users, only not exactly and in different ways! Just to pull out but one small example. We all could make a list with examples like that.

I know that because I read about Linux, not because I use Linux. As a Linux user, I have no awareness of that. I have an applet for sound stuff on my taskbar; if it isn't in the setting when I right click that applet, I don't know about it. So no, that fact isn't relevant at all.

Beamboom is literally saying that Linux should not only remain used by only a minority on the desktop, but specifying just who that minority should be allowed to be

Again: Nonsense. I am saying that Linux will never be the major mainstream desktop OS because of what it is.

Just like a system camera is not for everyone, Linux is not for everyone. But if someone wants to learn to use a system camera - go right ahead! Just don't expect it to be used like a pocket camera - nor should they TRY to!

And yes, I'm going to get "hot under the collar" when I'm told that people like me shouldn't have been allowed in the club.

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. You need to cool your collar her :) . Nobody here tells you so.

If that's not what you're saying I still can't figure out what you are in fact saying. The absolute best spin I can come up with is, I am a poor lost sheep who has by accident ended up using an operating system that by definition is not the one I'd be best off with, so for my own sake I should wise up and leave.

As it happens, that, while somewhat less offensive, is simply not true. I don't think you have much of a picture of what the Linux desktop can be like for straightforward users to use.

I've used apt and typed that I knew what I was doing a couple of times before. It's not something I do on a regular basis. I was removing what were considered critical packages, and that was ok. I would've been annoyed at the time if it didn't let me (because it would have turned into a case of damnit, on Gentoo this is much easier, grrrr!), but if there was a hint of where I could read more and figure out how to force things? That would've been fine.

Ah, well. I stand corrected. Clearly now and then people do want to do that. I guess I was under the impression that this only applied to adding packages with apt, not removing them, and it seemed to me an odd thing that anyone would want to do the task of removing key packages by adding some other package.
But they still can. Indeed, for people who know what they are doing I think it's easier, because as far as I can tell you can now build it into the initial command and have it just happen with no backchat, rather than doing the command and then typing a thing. I still don't see that the change is worth the bitching that it has received.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 21 November 2021 at 12:27 am UTC

There is a tiny little warning blended in with all the other white noise on the screen, and blaming Linus is just silly.

TINY? lol - dude, there was NO "white noise". There's FIRST an explicit warnings, very clearly put, AND info on what exact packages are about to be installed (for you to make up your own mind), then ANOTHER very explicit warning AND you're required to type a bloody SENTENCE to get through with it.
If that ain't clear enough then you're not really mature to use a system that gives you full control. You're supposed to READ what the system tells you. Read, and comprehend.

With great powers comes great responsibilities - and that goes for the package managers too. Most definitely.

But if you're after a OS that completely PADS you inside a fuzzy box where you can do nothing to harm you - well then Linux is not, was never and hopefully never will be your right choice.

Are you aware about incident has been on Pop!_OS? Beginer friendly distro?

Far be it from me to continue what is turning toxic, but it's hard not to point out that the problem was actually that the install from the gui didn't work and didn't break the system, and it took googling, following random comments from the 'net, and a command line to actually "break" it (not really broken, just without a graphical desktop).

If the reaction from (and I keep wanting to type POS, even though I know the bad humour in that) had been to do exactly what KDE has done here, would the conversation be different now?

And reason why is get to googling is gui fault. Gui can more explicitly say "try later or report error" and when you google it anyway apt can force you to write "Yes, remove esencial packages", or "Yes, potentialy break system" instead of "Yes, do as I say" becasue "Yes, do as I say" tells nothing.
Migrating Windows users dont know about writing sentence is somethink to be aware of.
I did not say that APT fix is best way. What i prefere is "Yes, potentionaly break system" and/or hide everethink from output except warnings/errors and and instruction to write "Yes, potentionaly break system" and another option "write 'detail' for full information"... That is my prefered way how handle this.

Since i use arch on my machine , there is no real default "net"

Really? I'm not familiar with arch, I've used the wiki a ton... it's So helpful!!

But I'd be really surprised if you have to backup all your custom confs in /etc because pacman overwrites them on every update. Or that a DE doesn't use PolKit (or equivalent) without some sort of base default rules package.

I feel it would be a little weird to have no system safe guards, even coming from upstream.

*I could be totally wrong about Arch and if so, I'd gladly share a frosty beverage of your choice if you could enlighten me on the rules.d local override process for Polkit. Trying to fix an issue with Steam and the network.

** Oh, I missed that part in your post. If you count OpenSuse as "mainstream". It has full system snapshot by default, courtesy of BTRFS. Reboot, pick the old snapshot in GRUB and good to go! (Ok... you need a terminal command to finish the rollback, you know, altering the file system and all).

There is a tiny little warning blended in with all the other white noise on the screen, and blaming Linus is just silly.

TINY? lol - dude, there was NO "white noise". There's FIRST an explicit warnings, very clearly put, AND info on what exact packages are about to be installed (for you to make up your own mind), then ANOTHER very explicit warning AND you're required to type a bloody SENTENCE to get through with it.
If that ain't clear enough then you're not really mature to use a system that gives you full control. You're supposed to READ what the system tells you. Read, and comprehend.

With great powers comes great responsibilities - and that goes for the package managers too. Most definitely.

But if you're after a OS that completely PADS you inside a fuzzy box where you can do nothing to harm you - well then Linux is not, was never and hopefully never will be your right choice.

Are you aware about incident has been on Pop!_OS? Beginer friendly distro?

Far be it from me to continue what is turning toxic, but it's hard not to point out that the problem was actually that the install from the gui didn't work and didn't break the system, and it took googling, following random comments from the 'net, and a command line to actually "break" it (not really broken, just without a graphical desktop).

If the reaction from (and I keep wanting to type POS, even though I know the bad humour in that) had been to do exactly what KDE has done here, would the conversation be different now?

And reason why is get to googling is gui fault. Gui can more explicitly say "try later or report error" and when you google it anyway apt can force you to write "Yes, remove esencial packages", or "Yes, potentialy break system" instead of "Yes, do as I say" becasue "Yes, do as I say" tells nothing.
Migrating Windows users dont know about writing sentence is somethink to be aware of.
I did not say that APT fix is best way. What i prefere is "Yes, potentionaly break system" and/or hide everethink from output except warnings/errors and and instruction to write "Yes, potentionaly break system" and another option "write 'detail' for full information"... That is my prefered way how handle this.

I agree. While my preference would be to significantly update apt's UI to provide better formatted info, I can't really be upset at this change.

The package manger is so powerful, fairly unique, and often used, it really needs a very good UI. We all know a package manger warning or error is a big deal, but brush off the hundreds of warnings and errors WINE throws out while gaming, because we understand the difference of the importance of those programs to the system, how common they occur, and thier impact.

Heck, I'd be ok with a short intro paragraph on first run emphasizing that the warning and errors can lead to system failure. I think sudo does a first run warning. Could even do it color! Or bold! Make use of all our fancy new terminal font abilities!!

Something like:

** WARNING - SYSTEM MODIFICATION **
The package manager ALTERS CRITICAL SYSTEM FUNCTIONS. Ignoring warnings or errors on ANY operation may result in system breakage. ESSENTIAL packages are needed for basic functionality and should NOT BE REMOVED. (And... Add something witty?)

Since i use arch on my machine , there is no real default "net"

Really? I'm not familiar with arch, I've used the wiki a ton... it's So helpful!!

But I'd be really surprised if you have to backup all your custom confs in /etc because pacman overwrites them on every update. Or that a DE doesn't use PolKit (or equivalent) without some sort of base default rules package.

I feel it would be a little weird to have no system safe guards, even coming from upstream.

*I could be totally wrong about Arch and if so, I'd gladly share a frosty beverage of your choice if you could enlighten me on the rules.d local override process for Polkit. Trying to fix an issue with Steam and the network.

** Oh, I missed that part in your post. If you count OpenSuse as "mainstream". It has full system snapshot by default, courtesy of BTRFS. Reboot, pick the old snapshot in GRUB and good to go! (Ok... you need a terminal command to finish the rollback, you know, altering the file system and all).

There are safe guards (like pacman usually by default don't overwrite configs but put them next to the existing file) Which is good and bad *lol* ... imagine a config not working because of a missing parameter after a reboot because you didn't checked for the new config template (hadn't had this since years but i had this a few times) *ups* << usually they are not leaving the system in an "unusable" state but i would probably define unusable different than a "newbie" :) -> imagine dns not working anymore after an systemd update or since i boot directly from efi into the kernel i once used an "outdated" way to write the root partition into efi ... lets say thanks god i always have a "normal" bootloader ready ...

With default i mean there is no default net which you can be sure to be find on every arch installation. I for example can boot my X even without polkit (init 2 -> startx /usr/bin/xterm ;) ). There are however packages with files under /usr/share/polkit-1/rules.d and /usr/share/polkit-1/actions. There is no special rule for steam (if that helps) The last issue i had with steam and network i fixed by setting up a local dns proxy and re-enabling ipv6 -> had a ipv4 only config before.

OpenSuse i would call as mainstream but when was the last time someone adviced OpenSuse somewhere for a beginner? Even during 7 pages of this discussion you and me are probably the only two who talk about OpenSuse / Suse so far. Being able to do so on the terminal is a step forward. But i guess we are far from "newbie" friendly even at this point.

Thanks for the info! I think we can certainly find arguments on what we would call a safety net or not, especially for a distro aiming for a more advanced (or adventurous) user.

Yeah, I would not advise a new user to use OpenSuse. There are just enough rough edges, even at my skill level, that I run into hiccups. I'll say my installs are non standard and I've tweaked a lot, so it could be user error.



PolKit is an enigma to me, especially since Suse seems to modify it, so it's not entirely the same as upstream and thier documentation is inconsistent. Steam tries to modify network settings on start, invoking a polkit rule. Depending on the DE, KDE just works, XFCE asks for the admin password, Enlightenment spams the password dialog, locking up the environment.

Maybe I should get this influencer guy to try it on OpenSuse? Lol

Thanks for the info! I think we can certainly find arguments on what we would call a safety net or not, especially for a distro aiming for a more advanced (or adventurous) user.

Yeah, I would not advise a new user to use OpenSuse. There are just enough rough edges, even at my skill level, that I run into hiccups. I'll say my installs are non standard and I've tweaked a lot, so it could be user error.



PolKit is an enigma to me, especially since Suse seems to modify it, so it's not entirely the same as upstream and thier documentation is inconsistent. Steam tries to modify network settings on start, invoking a polkit rule. Depending on the DE, KDE just works, XFCE asks for the admin password, Enlightenment spams the password dialog, locking up the environment.

Maybe I should get this influencer guy to try it on OpenSuse? Lol

Hmm i know NetworkManager has a polkit - policy. Maybe thats the one get used, i can't be sure cause i use systemd networkd. Dropped all the "fluff" for my none moveable pc. But i also don't see a reason why steam should change network settings -> maybe it's just using NetworkManager to detect if it is in online or offline mode or for some other "security" features ?

Additional Information after a small google search -> https://githubmemory.com/repo/ValveSoftware/steam-for-linux/issues/7856 << my guess sounds about right.
Additional Information (2nd) -> "If using systemd-networkd for network management, install lib32-systemd in order for Steam to be able to connect to its servers" from the arch wiki ;)

If i see it right -> it not only ask network manager for the network status but also needs networkmanager and most likely related polkit stuff to be in 32bit ....


Last edited by Glog78 on 21 November 2021 at 2:58 am UTC