MKR.
June 15th, 2006, 06:16 PM
The update manager tells me there are updates available. I load it, let it check, and I see a list of 16 updates.
I see several updates for my kernel, and an older kernel. Three updates for 386, 3 for 686; all look almost identical to me, and the boxes that should say what's different are either empty or give a generic description of the package.
I see that one of the 686 packages has a version number incrementally higher than my current kernel; the rest are the same version, or for a version I've never even had (or so it appears; with no changelog I can't know). Looking it up would be difficult since I can't copy+paste and google it, but then I still wouldn't know if there was a reason I'm being presented with what appears to be an old package.
There's an update for "xorg-driver-fglrx"; is that the proprietary one or the OSS one? The proprietary one makes my sound go nuts, and the OSS one (which I use) uses fake OpenGL acceleration. I can't risk having to go and undo this since everything works fine right now. Or...gasp, maybe I'm being presented with it because it supports real 3d accel now...or maybe not.
How am I supposed to know what to do with these? Why is it showing updates for a kernel I'm not using (and why would I want it to touch something that's only there as a failsafe?)?
I've elected not to install any of them since none appear to relate to security, though I can't be sure since there's no information on any of the packages.
Is anyone working on improving this? This seems like a very important part of Ubuntu's goal (opening Linux to the average person). If this is stumping an experienced computer user (not "I'm an expert at MS word" experienced; the real kind), imagine how rough it must be for people that wouldn't even know what half these packages are. The average person likely wouldn't even be able to assess the security risks involved with not updating.
The average user would have already been back in their comfort zone by this point (Windows or mac), and that seems counterproductive.
](*,)
I see several updates for my kernel, and an older kernel. Three updates for 386, 3 for 686; all look almost identical to me, and the boxes that should say what's different are either empty or give a generic description of the package.
I see that one of the 686 packages has a version number incrementally higher than my current kernel; the rest are the same version, or for a version I've never even had (or so it appears; with no changelog I can't know). Looking it up would be difficult since I can't copy+paste and google it, but then I still wouldn't know if there was a reason I'm being presented with what appears to be an old package.
There's an update for "xorg-driver-fglrx"; is that the proprietary one or the OSS one? The proprietary one makes my sound go nuts, and the OSS one (which I use) uses fake OpenGL acceleration. I can't risk having to go and undo this since everything works fine right now. Or...gasp, maybe I'm being presented with it because it supports real 3d accel now...or maybe not.
How am I supposed to know what to do with these? Why is it showing updates for a kernel I'm not using (and why would I want it to touch something that's only there as a failsafe?)?
I've elected not to install any of them since none appear to relate to security, though I can't be sure since there's no information on any of the packages.
Is anyone working on improving this? This seems like a very important part of Ubuntu's goal (opening Linux to the average person). If this is stumping an experienced computer user (not "I'm an expert at MS word" experienced; the real kind), imagine how rough it must be for people that wouldn't even know what half these packages are. The average person likely wouldn't even be able to assess the security risks involved with not updating.
The average user would have already been back in their comfort zone by this point (Windows or mac), and that seems counterproductive.
](*,)