An idea for YOU and SUSE
Hi, Would anyone agree about this being a useful feature of YOU? I'd like an option in there somewhere where you can tell it not to display certain updates. Like for the language packs. They take up quite a bit if screen and I don't need them. As an example: Right click on an update and select "Hide this update" then add a button that allows you to unhide them and view them to make sure you haven't done one accidently. Would this be possible in an upcoming release? I'd love this.
On Friday 10 February 2006 16:40, Allen wrote:
I'd like an option in there somewhere where you can tell it not to display certain updates. Like for the language packs. They take up quite a bit if screen and I don't need them.
Where are you seeing these 'language' updates?? I just did a YOU update of about 25 updates and nowhere on the screen did I see anything that I would consider superfluous.... other than the WAN or nVidia drivers and although they aren't important to me, they a) are important to many and b) amount to about 5 line entries. No, I wouldn't consider your option important.
On Friday 10 February 2006 7:04 pm, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Friday 10 February 2006 16:40, Allen wrote:
I'd like an option in there somewhere where you can tell it not to display certain updates. Like for the language packs. They take up quite a bit if screen and I don't need them.
Where are you seeing these 'language' updates?? I just did a YOU update of about 25 updates and nowhere on the screen did I see anything that I would consider superfluous.... other than the WAN or nVidia drivers and although they aren't important to me, they a) are important to many and b) amount to about 5 line entries.
No, I wouldn't consider your option important.
So because you alone don't seem to have what every installation here has it's not important? It's SUSE 9.3 Professional, and the language packs as I pointed out and for some reason you couldn't comprehend are OOo packages that I don't need, there are around 12 or more of hem and no way to tell it NOT to display it.
Allen wrote:
On Friday 10 February 2006 7:04 pm, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Friday 10 February 2006 16:40, Allen wrote:
I'd like an option in there somewhere where you can tell it not to display certain updates. Like for the language packs. They take up quite a bit if screen and I don't need them.
Where are you seeing these 'language' updates?? I just did a YOU update of about 25 updates and nowhere on the screen did I see anything that I would consider superfluous.... other than the WAN or nVidia drivers and although they aren't important to me, they a) are important to many and b) amount to about 5 line entries.
No, I wouldn't consider your option important.
So because you alone don't seem to have what every installation here has it's not important? It's SUSE 9.3 Professional, and the language packs as I pointed out and for some reason you couldn't comprehend are OOo packages that I don't need, there are around 12 or more of hem and no way to tell it NOT to display it.
I have to agree with Allen, here. When I was at 9.3, there were 50'ish language packs that appeared after I added Russian, French, Italian, and German to my list of languages for OOo, besides the useless nvidia and WLAN updates (I have neither, and no plans for either). When I went to 10.0, they all disappeared for a while, then suddenly the nvidia and WLAN stuff came back. I haven't had occasion yet to add the language packs to OOo, yet, but I shudder at the thought of bringing back all that crap. The only thing that makes it bearable is that the real updates seem to appear at the beginning of the list, so I was able to resist reading the whole craplist every time, based on the assurance of one of the list members that real updates will always precede the crap. Well, usually. I still can't resist scanning the craplist every once in a while to make sure it really is all crap. John Perry
Am Samstag, 11. Februar 2006 06:14 schrieb John Perry:
Allen wrote:
On Friday 10 February 2006 7:04 pm, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Friday 10 February 2006 16:40, Allen wrote:
I'd like an option in there somewhere where you can tell it not to display certain updates. Like for the language packs. They take up quite a bit if screen and I don't need them.
Where are you seeing these 'language' updates?? I just did a YOU update of about 25 updates and nowhere on the screen did I see anything that I would consider superfluous.... other than the WAN or nVidia drivers and although they aren't important to me, they a) are important to many and b) amount to about 5 line entries.
No, I wouldn't consider your option important.
So because you alone don't seem to have what every installation here has it's not important? It's SUSE 9.3 Professional, and the language packs as I pointed out and for some reason you couldn't comprehend are OOo packages that I don't need, there are around 12 or more of hem and no way to tell it NOT to display it.
I have to agree with Allen, here. When I was at 9.3, there were 50'ish language packs that appeared after I added Russian, French, Italian, and German to my list of languages for OOo, besides the useless nvidia and WLAN updates (I have neither, and no plans for either).
When I went to 10.0, they all disappeared for a while, then suddenly the nvidia and WLAN stuff came back. I haven't had occasion yet to add the language packs to OOo, yet, but I shudder at the thought of bringing back all that crap.
The only thing that makes it bearable is that the real updates seem to appear at the beginning of the list, so I was able to resist reading the whole craplist every time, based on the assurance of one of the list members that real updates will always precede the crap.
Well, usually. I still can't resist scanning the craplist every once in a while to make sure it really is all crap.
John Perry
Yes, it was annoying, with 10.0 I think I only have 2-3 taboo packages at the moment. I set mine to taboo which at least makes them easy to skip over. Having an option to hide taboo packets would be nice. Dave
On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 00:14 -0500, John Perry wrote:
When I went to 10.0, they all disappeared for a while, then suddenly the nvidia and WLAN stuff came back. I haven't had occasion yet to add the language packs to OOo, yet, but I shudder at the thought of bringing back all that crap.
The only thing that makes it bearable is that the real updates seem to appear at the beginning of the list, so I was able to resist reading the whole craplist every time, based on the assurance of one of the list members that real updates will always precede the crap.
Well, usually. I still can't resist scanning the craplist every once in a while to make sure it really is all crap.
Interesting, patches that fix security holes are considered crap. Perhaps it would have been better to say, patches that are not necessary to my system. These security updates certainly are not crap. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998
Ken Schneider wrote:
On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 00:14 -0500, John Perry wrote:
(knip)
Well, usually. I still can't resist scanning the craplist every once in a while to make sure it really is all crap.
Interesting, patches that fix security holes are considered crap. Perhaps it would have been better to say, patches that are not necessary to my system. These security updates certainly are not crap.
No they are not security updates. Most of them are localization files (for OO 1 for crying out loud) and I agree with Allen that it would be nice to be able to say "No I'm not downloading those files, not now, not ever, never". And whether they are crap or not is all in the eye of the beholder. -- Jos van Kan registered Linux user #152704
On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 13:52 +0100, Jos van Kan wrote:
Ken Schneider wrote:
On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 00:14 -0500, John Perry wrote:
(knip)
Well, usually. I still can't resist scanning the craplist every once in a while to make sure it really is all crap.
Interesting, patches that fix security holes are considered crap. Perhaps it would have been better to say, patches that are not necessary to my system. These security updates certainly are not crap.
No they are not security updates. Most of them are localization files (for OO 1 for crying out loud) and I agree with Allen that it would be nice to be able to say "No I'm not downloading those files, not now, not ever, never". And whether they are crap or not is all in the eye of the beholder.
I believe that the people that volunteer their time to write these programs would highly disagree with you calling them crap. But I will also agree that displaying patches/updates that do not apply to what I have installed should have a means of being hidden from view just as installed patches/updates are. Provide an option in the pulldown to should patches/updates for packages -not- installed. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998
Ken Schneider wrote:
On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 13:52 +0100, Jos van Kan wrote:
Ken Schneider wrote:
On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 00:14 -0500, John Perry wrote:
(knip)
Well, usually. I still can't resist scanning the craplist every once in a while to make sure it really is all crap.
Interesting, patches that fix security holes are considered crap. Perhaps it would have been better to say, patches that are not necessary to my system. These security updates certainly are not crap.
No they are not security updates. Most of them are localization files (for OO 1 for crying out loud) and I agree with Allen that it would be nice to be able to say "No I'm not downloading those files, not now, not ever, never". And whether they are crap or not is all in the eye of the beholder.
I believe that the people that volunteer their time to write these programs would highly disagree with you calling them crap. But I will also agree that displaying patches/updates that do not apply to what I have installed should have a means of being hidden from view just as installed patches/updates are. Provide an option in the pulldown to should patches/updates for packages -not- installed.
Technically I agree with you on every point, Ken, except on a minor one: I didn't call them crap. I said "crap is in the eye of the beholder". A non-chinese speaking, US-citizen would call the Chinese locale file to OO crap because it isn't of interest to him. That does not says anything about the intrinsic value of the file. Regards, -- Jos van Kan registered Linux user #152704
Ken Schneider wrote:
On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 13:52 +0100, Jos van Kan wrote:
No they are not security updates. Most of them are localization files (for OO 1 for crying out loud) and I agree with Allen that it would be nice to be able to say "No I'm not downloading those files, not now, not ever, never". And whether they are crap or not is all in the eye of the beholder.
I believe that the people that volunteer their time to write these programs would highly disagree with you calling them crap.
OK, so I've maybe used inappropriate terms to emphasize the frustration that the huge mass of (to me) useless information engenders. To anyone who feels I have offended them, I apologize.
But I will also agree that displaying patches/updates that do not apply to what I have installed should have a means of being hidden from view just as installed patches/updates are. Provide an option in the pulldown to should patches/updates for packages -not- installed.
Which is all any of us have asked for. If it's easy to do, it should be done soon. If it's hard, say so. But it should be addressed. Decades of research in human factors design have shown that too much information, especially inappropriate information, can be worse than too little. We should not have to wade through piles of localization tweaks to find important security updates. As I mentioned before, the apparent tendency to have really new stuff at the beginning relieves to a substantial degree the problem, but does not altogether eliminate it. Actually, I'd like to see a firm statement from someone who really knows that new updates will always be at the beginning. Someone who is involved in, or associated with, the YOU designers at suse. That would make me feel much better about ignoring the long list of, uh, "information I don't need and can't use" :-). John Perry
On Saturday 11 February 2006 12:08, John Perry wrote:
Ken Schneider wrote:
On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 13:52 +0100, Jos van Kan wrote:
No they are not security updates. Most of them are localization files (for OO 1 for crying out loud) and I agree with Allen that it would be nice to be able to say "No I'm not downloading those files, not now, not ever, never". And whether they are crap or not is all in the eye of the beholder.
I believe that the people that volunteer their time to write these programs would highly disagree with you calling them crap.
OK, so I've maybe used inappropriate terms to emphasize the frustration that the huge mass of (to me) useless information engenders. To anyone who feels I have offended them, I apologize.
But I will also agree that displaying patches/updates that do not apply to what I have installed should have a means of being hidden from view just as installed patches/updates are. Provide an option in the pulldown to should patches/updates for packages -not- installed.
Which is all any of us have asked for. If it's easy to do, it should be done soon. If it's hard, say so. But it should be addressed. Decades of research in human factors design have shown that too much information, especially inappropriate information, can be worse than too little. We should not have to wade through piles of localization tweaks to find important security updates. As I mentioned before, the apparent tendency to have really new stuff at the beginning relieves to a substantial degree the problem, but does not altogether eliminate it.
Actually, I'd like to see a firm statement from someone who really knows that new updates will always be at the beginning. Someone who is involved in, or associated with, the YOU designers at suse. That would make me feel much better about ignoring the long list of, uh, "information I don't need and can't use" :-).
I guess if this issue is the only thing customers have on their mind, then the SuSE distro is in pretty good shape. :-)
On Saturday 11 February 2006 12:08, John Perry wrote:
Ken Schneider wrote:
On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 13:52 +0100, Jos van Kan wrote:
No they are not security updates. Most of them are localization files (for OO 1 for crying out loud) and I agree with Allen that it would be nice to be able to say "No I'm not downloading those files, not now, not ever, never". And whether they are crap or not is all in the eye of
On Saturday, February 11, 2006 @ 11:33 AM, Bruce Marshall wrote: the
beholder.
I believe that the people that volunteer their time to write these programs would highly disagree with you calling them crap.
OK, so I've maybe used inappropriate terms to emphasize the frustration that the huge mass of (to me) useless information engenders. To anyone who feels I have offended them, I apologize.
But I will also agree that displaying patches/updates that do not apply to what I have installed should have a means of being hidden from view just as installed patches/updates are. Provide an option in the pulldown to should patches/updates for packages -not- installed.
Which is all any of us have asked for. If it's easy to do, it should be done soon. If it's hard, say so. But it should be addressed. Decades of research in human factors design have shown that too much information, especially inappropriate information, can be worse than too little. We should not have to wade through piles of localization tweaks to find important security updates. As I mentioned before, the apparent tendency to have really new stuff at the beginning relieves to a substantial degree the problem, but does not altogether eliminate it.
Actually, I'd like to see a firm statement from someone who really knows that new updates will always be at the beginning. Someone who is involved in, or associated with, the YOU designers at suse. That would make me feel much better about ignoring the long list of, uh, "information I don't need and can't use" :-).
I guess if this issue is the only thing customers have on their mind, then the SuSE distro is in pretty good shape. :-)
I know I'm coming in late on this conversation and don't really have a dog in this fight, but I'm just curious. I'm really still a lightweight in Linux and SuSE, even though I have had it installed for several years, but aren't YaST updates only offered for packages that you have installed? Assuming that's the case, couldn't the relevant application itself (OO in this case) organize things in such a way that additional add-ons are segregated into separate packages? That way, if you don't have that add-on, you don't get offered updates for it. As a matter of fact, I assume that's the things work now. That being the case, is it a situation where OO is not granular enough so that one can fine tune their installation so that they are only dealing with options that are relevant to their needs (different languages, for instance). I guess, from a design standpoint, this would be quite a chore, but, still, is this really a YaST issue or an application issue? I guess SuSE could add layers into YaST to enable the user to set screens on certain components, but is that really the best use of the support people's time? Then again, maybe I'm really not understanding the entire gist of this thread. If so, then simply ignore this post. Greg Wallace
On Saturday 11 February 2006 10:00, Greg Wallace wrote: <snip>
That way, if you don't have that add-on, you don't get offered updates for it. As a matter of fact, I assume that's the things work now. <snip>
The packages that show up in YOU are "OpenOffice-org1-**". The packages installed on my system are "OpenOffice_org"!!! I have KDE3 on my system, and I am not offered KDE2 packages through YOU!?!!?! Curious! Bernd
Hi All With SuSE 10 when I Minimised Apps they don't Appear On Taskbar, I have checked all the settings in Control Center - Desktop - Taskbar/Windows Behavior. Anyone any ideas Thanks Gerard
gceruti wrote:
With SuSE 10 when I Minimised Apps they don't Appear On Taskbar, I have checked all the settings in Control Center - Desktop - Taskbar/Windows Behavior. Anyone any ideas
Maybe your taskbar has disappeared for some reason. Try right-clicking on the panel and select "Add Applet to Panel" (you may need to go to "panel menu" to see this) and then select the Taskbar
On Monday 13 February 2006 23:11, Anders Johansson wrote:
gceruti wrote:
With SuSE 10 when I Minimised Apps they don't Appear On Taskbar, I have checked all the settings in Control Center - Desktop - Taskbar/Windows Behavior. Anyone any ideas
Maybe your taskbar has disappeared for some reason. Try right-clicking on the panel and select "Add Applet to Panel" (you may need to go to "panel menu" to see this) and then select the Taskbar Thanks Anders
That was it.
On Friday 10 February 2006 22:59, Allen wrote:
No, I wouldn't consider your option important.
So because you alone don't seem to have what every installation here has it's not important? It's SUSE 9.3 Professional, and the language packs as I pointed out and for some reason you couldn't comprehend are OOo packages that I don't need, there are around 12 or more of hem and no way to tell it NOT to display it.
Oh my, 12 lines of output are enough to cause SuSE to make major changes to YAST? Not in my opinion. Sounds like you're updating too often if this is a major problem for you.
Bruce Marshall wrote:
Oh my, 12 lines of output are enough to cause SuSE to make major changes to YAST?
Not in my opinion. Sounds like you're updating too often if this is a major problem for you.
Er, Bruce, as has been pointed out, 12 lines is just the start. And if we don't update regularly, it seems to me an even greater reflection on suse's service than complaining about inconvenience, with the attendant possibility of error brought on by excessive unnecessary detail. I do appreciate YOU; I use it religiously, and update as soon as the ball turns red (or even yellow). That doesn't mean I can't point out defects, even in such a huge advance in human interface as YOU. We maybe can't achieve perfection, but we can certainly work toward it, and should. I can't write software like YOU, but I can use it, evaluate its application to my needs, and suggest improvement. John Perry
On 2/10/06, Allen
Hi,
Would anyone agree about this being a useful feature of YOU?
I'd like an option in there somewhere where you can tell it not to display certain updates. Like for the language packs. They take up quite a bit if screen and I don't need them.
I agree wholeheartedly: http://support.novell.com/enhancement/index.html?sourceidint=suplnav4a_enhan... I've just done it ... your turn. P
Peter Van Lone wrote:
I agree wholeheartedly:
http://support.novell.com/enhancement/index.html?sourceidint=suplnav4a_enhan...
I've just done it ... your turn.
Done. Thanks for the nudge. jp
participants (11)
-
Allen -
Anders Johansson -
bernd -
Bruce Marshall -
David Wright -
gceruti -
Greg Wallace -
John Perry -
Jos van Kan -
Ken Schneider -
Peter Van Lone