Proposal: altered antix-Updater to deal better with running apt instances

Forum Forums antiX-development Development Proposal: altered antix-Updater to deal better with running apt instances

  • This topic has 18 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated Mar 25-1:19 pm by Brian Masinick.
Viewing 4 posts - 16 through 19 (of 19 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #137091
    Member
    PPC

      @All: slightly adapted version of antiX-Updater (with a different way to check if the computer is on-line, that’s less reliable but also less prone to false negatives):

      https://gitlab.com/antix-contribs/ppc-antix-scripts-public/-/raw/034e424160bcc83f98f5aef95106328318a2c46a/yad-updater

      Anyone interested, please test. This version still includes all the previous changes, including the possibility to be run with the “-r” flag to act just as a reminder that the users should check for updates, because they haven’t done so recently… This is basically the last feature that I though antiX was missing, in what concerns system updates- not automatically checking for updates, but at least, every time antiX starts, check if users have to be reminded to check for updates (of course only if “yad-updater -r &” is in the startup file. My advice, WHEN this version is picked up by anticapitalista is to include a GUI in Control Centre, that toggles that line on/off on antiX startup file (and eventually every time a package is installed and also when the system wakes from suspension. I think that’s better and less intrusive than running a cron job every few hours (that’s what I do on my work computer…)

      P.

      • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 5 days ago by PPC.
      • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 5 days ago by PPC.
      #137095
      Moderator
      Brian Masinick

        The latest tool seems to work fine; tried it out successfully and replaced my previous version with this one.

        --
        Brian Masinick

        #137720
        Member
        PPC

          @anticapitalista – I’ve been testing the proposed version of the script almost daily, without any problem, so last week I made a commit in antiX’s Git (antiX goodies). This version of the script has not displayed any false negatives about apt already running, seems to detect if users are on-line just fine and even the “-r” flag seems to work ok (I do use it in my own computer)

          P.

          #137730
          Moderator
          Brian Masinick

            @anticapitalista – I’ve been testing the proposed version of the script almost daily, without any problem, so last week I made a commit in antiX’s Git (antiX goodies). This version of the script has not displayed any false negatives about apt already running, seems to detect if users are on-line just fine and even the “-r” flag seems to work ok (I do use it in my own computer)

            P.

            I copied the code in this latest script and explicitly ran my morning updates through this.
            My only update this morning was to the Mozilla-packaged Firefox Nightly Web Browser;
            the tool, as currently configured, successfully verified Internet connectivity, allowed the choice of either “Automatic” or “Manual” choosing of updates, as previous versions have done, then cleanly performed the update.

            From the standpoint of a “casual observation” without close examination, the tool performed as expected. Just to run an additional use case, after already having performed today’s updates, and also waiting long enough that sudo authentication was required for another run, I tested this, and the tool also worked, so I’ve explicitly examined a couple of the possible conditions and use cases and the result is positive; looks solid to me.

            --
            Brian Masinick

          Viewing 4 posts - 16 through 19 (of 19 total)
          • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.