[NTLUG:Discuss] Ubuntu Developer Summit for version 10.04

[Ralph Green]

On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 13:21 -0500, Ted Gould wrote:
> >   I'll think about this.  One thing I want to learn more about is
> > virtualization.  I have used the vm-builder in Ubuntu.  It is a good
> > start, and I can see other things being built that make it more useful.
> > I don't have enough hardware that supports virtualization in KVM to make
> > my own cloud yet.  I will soon, and that is what I want to learn about.
> > I know you said these are not general purpose learning sessions.  I
> > think I have used the underlying tools enough that I would gain from
> > these sessions and maybe be able to contribute.
> 
> You should only need one machine that can run KVM to set up a basic UEC
> cloud for playing with.  You'll need another machine for the scheduler,
> but I'm pretty sure it doesn't need to be KVM compatible.  Of course, a
> cloud of one machine isn't super interesting, but good for learning :)
> 
  I suppose I could do it with one machine.  I did not think that would
be very useful, even as a test.  2 or 3 machines seems like a good place
to start.  I'll have 2 machines by later this week, and I'll start with
that.


> >   The way update notification works in 9.04 is really annoying.  I know
> > what they were trying to accomplish, but the solution is worse than the
> > cure.  The single worst part is having Update Manager open up on the
> > screen when it find updates.  This happens in the middle of
> > presentations, or other things you are trying to use the computer for.
> > I don't tend to work on the newest computers and Update Manager is not
> > only distracting, but noticeably slows down the desktop until it
> > finishes loading.
> 
> It, by design, should always start in the background and ask for
> attention.  So if it is appearing above any window, that is a bug.
> 
  It starts in the background.  But, that is still a bad thing.  It
noticeably slows down whatever you are working on until it finishes
loading.  The window itself is distracting and it starts flashing in the
task bar until you pay attention to it.  

> >  Now, you can turn off the auto launch of Update Manager, but that still
> > leaves notifications that are too strong.  That big red arrow comes up.
> > It makes it look like your system is in danger, even if the updates is
> > something like the recent time zone updates.  I am about to start
> > putting a cron job in to "pkill update-notifier" once an hour or more
> > often.  One of the things I do is setting up machines for people who
> > have very little computer experience.  I have kept the deployed machines
> > at Ubuntu 8.10 so far.  I don't want to stay with an older version, but
> > the way 9.04 works for notifying about updates is just not acceptable.
> > Is it going to get better?
> 
> First, in general I would not recommend killing update-manager.  Things
> like security updates should be acted upon promptly.  I think no matter
> how much computer experience someone has, they should learn this on any
> system they're nominally put in charge of.
> 
> I think that the solution you're probably looking for here is just to
> set up autoinstall updates.  You can do that in software sources, you
> shouldn't get any popups.  And as long as you don't enable things like
> backports the system should remain stable.
> 
  That is not the solution I am looking for.  It is not even close.  I
need to have usable systems and automatic updates is not the way to
accomplish that.  There was at least one time this last 6 months that an
update broke stable systems.  It was the Intel X11 drivers and an update
made them where X would not start.  I have several computers.  I waited
a day or two, and logged in from a virtual console and updated to get
things working.  I don't expect inexperienced computer users to do that.
Automatic updates is not something I can safely deploy.  I expect I
would have ended up driving around North Texas, visiting customers and
fixing their computers.

> Autoupdate isn't setup by default as many people feel uncomfortable with
> the computer doing things without their permission.  Personally, I feel
> like this is a misperception as it already turns of the screen for
> you :)  But, that's the reason it's not enabled by default.
> 
  I hope that is not the only reason it is off.  Whoever makes that
decision for Ubuntu should know it is likely to cause infrequent, but
serious problems if it is turned on.  My customers run pretty simple
applications, mostly email and web browsers.  A lot of people run more
demanding applications that have even more dependencies.  Ubuntu has
been pretty good about updates not breaking things, but not good enough
to recommend auto update.

 I would not want auto update for myself, either.  I have two computers
that run a bunch of virtual machines using VirtualBox.  Neither can use
KVM because they don't have hardware virtualization support.  I have to
shutdown all those virtual machines and reboot the host machine when one
of the many updates comes through that requires rebooting.  I need to
control when that happens, so the work being done by those virtual
machines is not impacted too badly.  I may run more virtual machines at
home than many people, but I know I am not alone.  Auto update would be
a terrible thing for me have turned on.

Good day,
Ralph