Bugzilla – Bug 227265
upgrade is not "install all" (10.0->10.2), (10.2->10.3)
Last modified: 2007-10-06 11:08:52 UTC
I have opensuse 10.0 and now I want to make an upgrade to 10.2. So I started upgrade -- now, the installer shows me that 103% of disk space is needed. Why? Because instead of really upgrading my system installer decided do install such absolutely necessary apps like chromium, ruby, boost, etc -- the list is long. I would say, ok, if boost is needed by some newer version of already installed app, ok. But I don't believe that all of the sudden all interpreters (ruby, perl, python) are must-have. Please, upgrade should mean -- upgrade ALREADY INSTALLED software. Not -- "install new stuff". The user has to waste her/his time to deselect of those "extras".
Click on "Update Options" in the update proposal, there you can choose between "update + install" (the default value) and "just update". You can also decide to not remove unmaintained packages (which are not shipped anymore)...
Ok, such option exists but sorry, it is one of the worst design solutions I have ever seen. Update should mean update, install install, remove remove. Do not change the meaning of the words. That's the one thing -- the most important. The second one. I used system X.Y.Z. I had a chance to install frozen bubble. I used my system for a looooong time. And I didn't install this game. And all of the sudden, when updating the choice is made (automatically) to install this game for me, because probably for all those years I just didn't know how to do it, and now I could have it. Voila. Illumination. 1) please provide exact action for each choice -- for example, updating for updating 2) if you want to provide more actions make them optional -- not the other way, in such case user is really saying "update. no, no, not install+update, update. No, no, no format+update. Just update. No, no..." What is in opensuse it is actually a example for user nightmare because without checking every possible option you can never be sure if there is no extra "smart" option which is enabled by default and which does something the user does not want. In other words -- user cannot trust the software (how anyone can be sure that update by default does not mean "reformat all partitions except this one for update?").
If anyone is not convinced yet (the design) consider installation. Yes, installation. Should installation by default repartition the first disk in the system with an option for user that she/he should find a button on the bottom of the screen with several items, one item is about partitioning and then it is possible to choose the disk and partitioning. Or should the installation _show_ the question right in front of his/her eyes and ask if the first disk should be partitioned automatically or she/he want to set it by herself/himself?
To comment #2: Update means "update to the standard system". After update you should have the same system as if you would do a complete installation. That's what the most users expect I think. There are two points: 1. The new version of the system might have some new functionality which requires new packages to be active. 2. It would be impossible to do installation support if every update could produce different result depending on your previous version. (Imagine update from the previous version and update from the version before it.) To comment #3: No, the concept of the installer is to propose reasonable values and let user confirm them. If the user wants to change something then it's possible just by clicking on the header in the proposal. It's much better than asking many questions like "Do you agree with A", "Do you wanto to do B?", "Are you sure?".... Do you think that a beginner user knows something about partitioning? No. It's better to offer reasonable value (resize a partition and create a new one) instead of asking strange questions. Conclution: The installation workflow won't be changed.
#2 But in other languages it does not mean so -- even in English I am not so sure that "update" mean this. In such case I could update A version with A version, and the result would be more programs. And what is such thing as "standard system"? Is KDE is standard or Gnome is standard? 1) of course, this is beyond this discussion -- it is obvious to install REQUIRED libs 2) what is that scary in this? And how come such "standard system" means frozen bubble, chromium and other really must-have software? #3 You mean it is better to trash the data from the first disk in the system without asking, hmm, quite interesting design. There are two question with one subquestion (which leads to two subquestion -- major saving btw.) and all this is simply obscure. Why not: o install fresh system right from the beginning o update only installed components [ ] add also new software with turned off by default. What harm is this? The design you presented is (I repeat) wasting user time. But sure, don't change it -- who cares about users. Better provide some criptic options burried somewhere on the screen, so on the 3rd level you finally can say "yes, JUST update". I hope you will got bitten by such design someday, maybe that will clarify that "do X" means "do X" not "do X and Y and Z and ..." ("...because nobody told not to do Y and Z and ...").
(In reply to comment #5) > And what is such thing as "standard system"? Is KDE is standard or Gnome is > standard? The desktop should be unchanged. If it is changed than it's a bug. > 1) of course, this is beyond this discussion -- it is obvious to install > REQUIRED libs > 2) what is that scary in this? And how come such "standard system" means frozen > bubble, chromium and other really must-have software? AFAIK they are in the standard installation. > #3 > You mean it is better to trash the data from the first disk in the system > without asking, hmm, quite interesting design. Of course not. If you do not want to use the proposed disk you can simply change it. > There are two question with one subquestion (which leads to two subquestion -- > major saving btw.) and all this is simply obscure. > Why not: > o install fresh system right from the beginning > o update only installed components > [ ] add also new software OK, it sounds reasonable.
Lukas, this is a feature request to make some options from "Update Options" dialog available in the installation/update selection.
Ladislav, thanks :-), I hope opensuse will be only better much simpler and cleaner design.
Could you, please, attach your YaST logs? Maybe it's rather a problem in dependency solver (or some pre-selections) then wrong default setup of update. Thanks
Lukas, I doubt it. https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=227375 Since I am asked for y2logs every time, I will save some space -- the logs are the same.
I have added a help text to that update proposal and made the proposal more visibly understandable. Unfortunately adding widget "[ ] add also new software" was impossible to implement because that dialog needs to show as few widgets as possible and adding it somewhere else didn't make sense because it's already accessible from the proposal. Additionally, I'm thinking about adding some one-click switches to that proposal, the same ones that are used in network proposal, for instance. However labeling of that one-click texts is quite difficult. All labels that say something useful are too long (Adding into my TODO). Anyway, fixed for now.
I upgraded to 10.3 (for the first time) and I don't see it is fixed. For the second time I had to manually remove all those chromium, frozen-bubble, mahjong, in short useless (for me, those are fine games) software to make upgrade. Upgrade kde4 cannot be upgrade really because I didn't have any of this on my computer ever! (I had chromium when installed suse for the first time, but since then I removed it). And I didn't spot any option to set "upgrade, really upgrade". I have two computers, next upgrade tomorrow, I will check if some secret option exists :-) Reopening.
Ok, I found it. Hmm, I am not convinced it is right placement, but I'd better post another report for it.