• seathru@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    801·
    6 months ago

    WTF are all these “Refresh of version…” updates? Am I unfresh? Do I need to bathe? (probably)

    Edit: It’s like it saw my post from yesterday and said “oh you like that do you?”

    • TurboWafflz@lemmy.world
      59·
      6 months ago

      I had been wondering about that too so I looked it up and apparently it’s just what discover displays whenever there’s an update that doesn’t change the version number which is things like rebuilds with a newer compiler. Very confusing wording, I feel like just “update of version [version]” would be less confusing

      • bitfucker@programming.dev
        202·
        6 months ago

        This is why semver is a thing. If a program is released under 1.1.x, and then recompiled with a new compiler, then it can be 1.1.y where y > x

          • bitfucker@programming.dev
            10·
            6 months ago

            Yeah, but in the context of flatpak isn’t the distribution managed by the developer themselves? Also, in the distro release version case, they usually add something distro specific to differentiate it.

            • Rustmilian@lemmy.worldEnglish
              61·
              6 months ago

              isn’t the distribution managed by the developer themselves?

              No, most often it’s not.
              Valve literally just had a fiasco with them not long ago with them falsely marking steam as verified when Valve are not the ones packing the Flatpak.

            • Sonotsugipaa@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
              1·
              6 months ago

              I’m not sure about specific packages, but in general a packager may not want to increase the upstream version even if they can do it themselves - for example, they may have made some mistake in the packaging process.

              • bitfucker@programming.dev
                1·
                6 months ago

                Yes, and hence my comment on flatpak which turns out is false (that the upstream developer is usually the distributor/packager too). And the other still applies, distro usually adds a specific tag anyway for their refresh. Like that one time xz on rolling debian was named something x.y.z-really-a.b.c.

                I think flatpak packagers should also append the specific tag too if that is the case. Like, x.y.z-flatpak-w where w can be the build release version

        • woelkchen@lemmy.world
          7·
          6 months ago

          openSUSE, the by far most reliable rolling release distribution. Reliable packages are more important than a bit of data traffic.

  • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
    47·
    6 months ago

    I mean, I just set my system to only check for updates once a week.

    There’s no real reason to install every update, the second it’s available. If there’s a big security fix you should get asap, you’ll hear about it.

  • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
    36·
    6 months ago

    At some point I think some devs might be refactoring a switch-case into an if-else and calling it an “update” to troll downstreams.

    • lurch (he/him)@sh.itjust.works
      34·
      6 months ago

      apparently fools consider a finished app “dead” or “abandoned” if there isn’t a new release every week. so yeah, dev’s will just change a comment to not have their apps shunned

  • MalReynolds@slrpnk.netEnglish
    15·
    6 months ago

    Try whatever ublue floats your boat, it all happens in the background, the power of atomic updates baby, if something breaks, just go back to the previous one…

  • cygnus@lemmy.ca
    14·
    6 months ago

    Joke’s on you, I use Arch and already reboot twice a day for updates.

  • Mio@feddit.nu
    91·
    6 months ago

    This is the part i dislike like with Fedora compared with Ubuntu. It is so many updates.

    But since you can choose the time when to install the updates, there is a less of a problem.

    Normally you don’t notice any difference. And updates is much faster to install on Linux in general. Windows eats loads of CPU.

  • Toes♀@ani.social
    147·
    6 months ago

    This is why I use the LTS edition for my OS

    Edit: I’m a dum dum and didn’t know flatpak updates showed up like that.

  • h3ndrik@feddit.de
    72·
    6 months ago

    Meh. No Flatpak, no worries. And no updates, no new software or security patches.

    • Successful_Try543@feddit.de
      91·
      6 months ago

      Speaking of Debian:

      No bugfixes? Yes. The software will not be changed to fix a usual bug.

      No security patches? No. Security patches are applied.

      • h3ndrik@feddit.de
        5·
        6 months ago

        I have Debian on my servers for a decade or so, and on several workstations. My past experience doesn’t quite reflect that. The Debian guys and gals have always been pretty quick with patching the vulnerabilities. Like outstanding fast.

        There is some merit to the bugfixing. But that’s kind of the point of Debian Stable(?!) Like in the meme picture of this post I don’t want updates each day. And I also don’t want the software on my servers to change too much on their own. I know my bugs and have already dealt with them and I’m happy that it now works seamlessly for 6 months or so…

        And that’s also why I have Debian Testing on my computer. That gives me sort of an unofficial rolling distro. With lots of updates and bugfixes. I mean in the end you can’t have no updates and lots of updates at the same time. It’s either - or. And we can choose depending on the use-case. (I think the blame is on the admin if they choose a wrong tool for a task.)

        • Successful_Try543@feddit.de
          5·
          6 months ago

          Exactly. The Debian team is quite conservative in fixing non-critical bugs in the stable branch, as it may introduce new bugs.

          If one wants more up-to-date software, the testing branch is a valid choice or Siduction, if one is brave enough.

          • AlexanderESmith@kbin.social
            3·
            6 months ago

            The point of my original post was that their update cadence is slower. The point of my followup reply is that they are not devoid of updates, either.

            They have a release every 1-2 years, and it’s packed full for various tweeks, improvements, and new features. They fix broken shit, and enhance where it makes sense.

            I don’t need my window manager to get fad features, and I don’t need constant updates. It does what I want it to do already.

            xfce ftw.

  • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    12·
    6 months ago

    Thank you for spelling “every time” properly, and I’m sorry we’re at the stage where that’s an accomplishment.