These last few weeks, my Update Manager gets bombarded by updates for
Freedesktop Platform, Freedesktop SDK or other things, almost everyday.

Anyone knows where this comes from? Is this normal? I have no idea if
this is related to a program I have installed or how to get rid of them.

Thanks.

On 10/21/23 11:56 AM, this is what Monsieur wrote:
>
> These last few weeks, my Update Manager gets bombarded by updates for Freedesktop Platform, Freedesktop SDK or other
> things, almost everyday.
>
> Anyone knows where this comes from? Is this normal? I have no idea if this is related to a program I have installed or
> how to get rid of them.
>
> Thanks.
>
Do you have / use flatpak?
--
Linux Mint 21.2 Cinnamon
Al

Big Al wrote:
> On 10/21/23 11:56 AM, this is what Monsieur wrote:
>>
>> These last few weeks, my Update Manager gets bombarded by updates for
>> Freedesktop Platform, Freedesktop SDK or other things, almost everyday.
>>
>> Anyone knows where this comes from? Is this normal? I have no idea if
>> this is related to a program I have installed or how to get rid of them.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
> Do you have / use flatpak?

Yes, I think so. Is that the cause?
I'm going to look into it, thanks.

Monsieur wrote:
> These last few weeks, my Update Manager gets bombarded by updates for
> Freedesktop Platform, Freedesktop SDK or other things, almost everyday.
>
> Anyone knows where this comes from? Is this normal? I have no idea if
> this is related to a program I have installed or how to get rid of them.

On my system, the option in Updates Preferences for 'Only show
notifications for security and kernel updates' is checked.

--
Mike Easter

Mike Easter wrote:
> Monsieur wrote:
>> These last few weeks, my Update Manager gets bombarded by updates for
>> Freedesktop Platform, Freedesktop SDK or other things, almost everyday.
>>
>> Anyone knows where this comes from? Is this normal? I have no idea if
>> this is related to a program I have installed or how to get rid of them.
>
> On my system, the option in Updates Preferences for 'Only show
> notifications for security and kernel updates' is checked.

That option is checked for me too, but still the Freedesktop updates
keep coming.

Personally I think this whole update-mania is getting out of hand. You'd
think that by now programmers could write a piece of code that can last
longer than a day or two.

Apparently not.

On 10/21/23 1:45 PM, Monsieur wrote:
> Mike Easter wrote:
>> Monsieur wrote:
>>> These last few weeks, my Update Manager gets bombarded by updates
>>> for Freedesktop Platform, Freedesktop SDK or other things, almost
>>> everyday.
>>>
>>> Anyone knows where this comes from? Is this normal? I have no idea
>>> if this is related to a program I have installed or how to get rid
>>> of them.
>>
>> On my system, the option in Updates Preferences for 'Only show
>> notifications for security and kernel updates' is checked.
>
> That option is checked for me too, but still the Freedesktop updates
> keep coming.
>
> Personally I think this whole update-mania is getting out of hand.
> You'd think that by now programmers could write a piece of code that
> can last longer than a day or two.
>
> Apparently  not.
>
I am not seeing any increase in updates here 20.3. It must have
something to do with the packages you have installed and their
dependencies.

Monsieur wrote:
> Mike Easter wrote:
>> Monsieur wrote:
>>> These last few weeks, my Update Manager gets bombarded by updates for
>>> Freedesktop Platform, Freedesktop SDK or other things, almost everyday.
>>>
>>> Anyone knows where this comes from? Is this normal? I have no idea if
>>> this is related to a program I have installed or how to get rid of them.
>>
>> On my system, the option in Updates Preferences for 'Only show
>> notifications for security and kernel updates' is checked.
>
> That option is checked for me too, but still the Freedesktop updates
> keep coming.
>
I wouldn't think those updates would be coded as security or kernel.
Maybe there is some kind of 'problem' or 'hole' caused by flatpaks and
the update manager not being on the same 'page'. That is, update
manager 'rules' don't apply to flatpak packages.

> Personally I think this whole update-mania is getting out of hand. You'd
> think that by now programmers could write a piece of code that can last
> longer than a day or two.
>
Here's a discussion in the Mint forum

https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=391087
LM 21.1 - Disable Flatpak Update in Update Manager?

14 msg/s '23 Feb-Mar - useful

--
Mike Easter

On 10/21/23 3:48 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Monsieur wrote:
>> Mike Easter wrote:
>>> Monsieur wrote:
>>>> These last few weeks, my Update Manager gets bombarded by updates
>>>> for Freedesktop Platform, Freedesktop SDK or other things, almost
>>>> everyday.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone knows where this comes from? Is this normal? I have no idea
>>>> if this is related to a program I have installed or how to get rid
>>>> of them.
>>>
>>> On my system, the option in Updates Preferences for 'Only show
>>> notifications for security and kernel updates' is checked.
>>
>> That option is checked for me too, but still the Freedesktop updates
>> keep coming.
>>
> I wouldn't think those updates would be coded as security or kernel.
> Maybe there is some kind of 'problem' or 'hole' caused by flatpaks and
> the update manager not being on the same 'page'. That is, update
> manager 'rules' don't apply to flatpak packages.
>
>> Personally I think this whole update-mania is getting out of hand.
>> You'd think that by now programmers could write a piece of code that
>> can last longer than a day or two.
>>
> Here's a discussion in the Mint forum
>
> https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=391087
> LM 21.1 - Disable Flatpak Update in Update Manager?
>
> 14 msg/s '23 Feb-Mar - useful
>
>
>
Have I not read at this forum that flatpak=bloat, designed to make
installing a package more easy. Sure enough all those updates are
harbingers of bloat.

Nic wrote:
> Have I not read at this forum that flatpak=bloat, designed to make
> installing a package more easy. Sure enough all those updates are
> harbingers of bloat.

Personally, I prefer to get my packages primarily from the repo/s of the
distro, which in the case of Mint include Ub and Mint repo/s
historically. My next choice would be conventional .deb packaging as a
hopefully trustworthy .ppa.

At a distant 3rd would be some kind of .deb which is not exactly
packaged for my specific version of mint/ub but which might work anyway.
The problem comes what to do after those approaches aren't available.
There's the consideration of .rpm for some other distro.

One of the reasons the 'fat packs' are considered, which are bloated, is
because of the fact that they bring a sand-boxy environment or are
usable across different distros.

That family includes AppImage, Flatpak, and Snap. They are 'bloated'
compared to .deb/s because of the support they 'have to' bring along w/
them.

One can reach the point of 'having to' consider such fat packs when
there aren't other alternatives other than compiling.

It is easier to use a flatpak, which Mint favors much over Snap, than it
is to compile something, so I might use a flatpak if there were none of
my choices which I listed above that.

I would also consider compiling; because in the past sometimes when I
compiled something it worked pretty easily; but other times it didn't
work easily at all.

So, that's how I 'look at it'. Nothing is ruled out thru' that plan A B
C D list, I would use flatpak and don't usually enable Snap; but I might
use Snap on a live boot of some kind of Ubuntu that was temporary.

--
Mike Easter

On 10/21/23 06:23 PM, this is what Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic wrote:
>> Have I not read at this forum that flatpak=bloat, designed to make installing a package more easy. Sure enough all
>> those updates are harbingers of bloat.
>
> Personally, I prefer to get my packages primarily from the repo/s of the distro, which in the case of Mint include Ub
> and Mint repo/s historically.  My next choice would be conventional .deb packaging as a hopefully trustworthy .ppa.
>
> At a distant 3rd would be some kind of .deb which is not exactly packaged for my specific version of mint/ub but which
> might work anyway.  The problem comes what to do after those approaches aren't available. There's the consideration of
> .rpm for some other distro.
>
> One of the reasons the 'fat packs' are considered, which are bloated, is because of the fact that they bring a sand-boxy
> environment or are usable across different distros.
>
> That family includes AppImage, Flatpak, and Snap.  They are 'bloated' compared to .deb/s because of the support they
> 'have to' bring along w/ them.
>
> One can reach the point of 'having to' consider such fat packs when there aren't other alternatives other than compiling.
>
> It is easier to use a flatpak, which Mint favors much over Snap, than it is to compile something, so I might use a
> flatpak if there were none of my choices which I listed above that.
>
> I would also consider compiling; because in the past sometimes when I compiled something it worked pretty easily; but
> other times it didn't work easily at all.
>
> So, that's how I 'look at it'.  Nothing is ruled out thru' that plan A B C D list, I would use flatpak and don't usually
> enable Snap; but I might use Snap on a live boot of some kind of Ubuntu that was temporary.
>
>
I don't mind appimage. They are so simple to install and remove. I just make a launcher and answer yes to put it on
the menu. Only problem is that goes in 'other'. But oh hey!

With disk space now, this 'bloat' isn't much of an issue with me.
--
Linux Mint 21.2 Cinnamon
Al

Big Al wrote:
> I don't mind appimage.  They are so simple to install and remove.  I
> just make a launcher and answer yes to put it on the menu.  Only problem
> is that goes in 'other'.  But oh hey!
>
> With disk space now, this 'bloat' isn't much of an issue with me.

One article comparing the packages said that Snap and AppImage ran from
compressed source and the example of the app compared in the article
flatpak was about 2.5x the size of the Snap or AppImage. Another didn't
say it that way.

A different article I had read previously also compared how likely one
was to find what they were seeking in the different packages based on
how many were available in each ranking Snap > AppImage > Flatpak.

https://www.baeldung.com/linux/snaps-flatpak-appimage
https://phoenixnap.com/kb/flatpak-vs-snap-vs-appimage

--
Mike Easter

On 10/21/23 06:52 PM, this is what Mike Easter wrote:
> Big Al wrote:
>> I don't mind appimage.  They are so simple to install and remove.  I just make a launcher and answer yes to put it on
>> the menu.  Only problem is that goes in 'other'.  But oh hey!
>>
>> With disk space now, this 'bloat' isn't much of an issue with me.
>
> One article comparing the packages said that Snap and AppImage ran from compressed source and the example of the app
> compared in the article flatpak was about 2.5x the size of the Snap or AppImage.  Another didn't say it that way.
>
> A different article I had read previously also compared how likely one was to find what they were seeking in the
> different packages based on how many were available in each ranking Snap > AppImage > Flatpak.
>
> https://www.baeldung.com/linux/snaps-flatpak-appimage
> https://phoenixnap.com/kb/flatpak-vs-snap-vs-appimage
>
I haven't had issues finding what I want. I only have flatpak working for one program the author fixed yet the fix
won't make it to repros. I had one appimage but drop it. But I know the diff between them somewhat. I couldn't tell
speed if you paid me. :-)
--
Linux Mint 21.2 Cinnamon
Al

On 21/10/2023 23:40, Big Al wrote:
> On 10/21/23 06:23 PM, this is what Mike Easter wrote:
>> Nic wrote:
>>> Have I not read at this forum that flatpak=bloat, designed to make
>>> installing a package more easy. Sure enough all those updates are
>>> harbingers of bloat.
>>
>> Personally, I prefer to get my packages primarily from the repo/s of
>> the distro, which in the case of Mint include Ub and Mint repo/s
>> historically. My next choice would be conventional .deb packaging as
>> a hopefully trustworthy .ppa.
>>
>> At a distant 3rd would be some kind of .deb which is not exactly
>> packaged for my specific version of mint/ub but which might work
>> anyway. The problem comes what to do after those approaches aren't
>> available. There's the consideration of .rpm for some other distro.
>>
>> One of the reasons the 'fat packs' are considered, which are bloated,
>> is because of the fact that they bring a sand-boxy environment or are
>> usable across different distros.
>>
>> That family includes AppImage, Flatpak, and Snap. They are 'bloated'
>> compared to .deb/s because of the support they 'have to' bring along
>> w/ them.
>>
>> One can reach the point of 'having to' consider such fat packs when
>> there aren't other alternatives other than compiling.
>>
>> It is easier to use a flatpak, which Mint favors much over Snap, than
>> it is to compile something, so I might use a flatpak if there were
>> none of my choices which I listed above that.
>>
>> I would also consider compiling; because in the past sometimes when I
>> compiled something it worked pretty easily; but other times it didn't
>> work easily at all.
>>
>> So, that's how I 'look at it'. Nothing is ruled out thru' that plan A
>> B C D list, I would use flatpak and don't usually enable Snap; but I
>> might use Snap on a live boot of some kind of Ubuntu that was temporary.
>>
>>
> I don't mind appimage. They are so simple to install and remove. I
> just make a launcher and answer yes to put it on the menu. Only problem
> is that goes in 'other'. But oh hey!

Edit the newly created .desktop file - probably in
$HOME/.local/share/applications - and add/edit a Categories= line. Check
available Categories= in /usr/share/applications/*.desktop

> With disk space now, this 'bloat' isn't much of an issue with me.

--
Chris Elvidge, England
I WILL NOT SAY "SPRINGFIELD" JUST TO GET APPLAUSE

On 21/10/2023 23:40, Big Al wrote:
> On 10/21/23 06:23 PM, this is what Mike Easter wrote:
>> Nic wrote:
>>> Have I not read at this forum that flatpak=bloat, designed to make
>>> installing a package more easy. Sure enough all those updates are
>>> harbingers of bloat.
>>
>> Personally, I prefer to get my packages primarily from the repo/s of
>> the distro, which in the case of Mint include Ub and Mint repo/s
>> historically. My next choice would be conventional .deb packaging as
>> a hopefully trustworthy .ppa.
>>
>> At a distant 3rd would be some kind of .deb which is not exactly
>> packaged for my specific version of mint/ub but which might work
>> anyway. The problem comes what to do after those approaches aren't
>> available. There's the consideration of .rpm for some other distro.
>>
>> One of the reasons the 'fat packs' are considered, which are bloated,
>> is because of the fact that they bring a sand-boxy environment or are
>> usable across different distros.
>>
>> That family includes AppImage, Flatpak, and Snap. They are 'bloated'
>> compared to .deb/s because of the support they 'have to' bring along
>> w/ them.
>>
>> One can reach the point of 'having to' consider such fat packs when
>> there aren't other alternatives other than compiling.
>>
>> It is easier to use a flatpak, which Mint favors much over Snap, than
>> it is to compile something, so I might use a flatpak if there were
>> none of my choices which I listed above that.
>>
>> I would also consider compiling; because in the past sometimes when I
>> compiled something it worked pretty easily; but other times it didn't
>> work easily at all.
>>
>> So, that's how I 'look at it'. Nothing is ruled out thru' that plan A
>> B C D list, I would use flatpak and don't usually enable Snap; but I
>> might use Snap on a live boot of some kind of Ubuntu that was temporary.
>>
>>
> I don't mind appimage. They are so simple to install and remove. I
> just make a launcher and answer yes to put it on the menu. Only problem
> is that goes in 'other'. But oh hey!

Edit the newly created .desktop file - probably in
$HOME/.local/share/applications - and add/edit a Categories= line. Check
available Categories= in /usr/share/applications/*.desktop

>
> With disk space now, this 'bloat' isn't much of an issue with me.

Agreed.

--
Chris Elvidge, England
I WILL NOT SAY "SPRINGFIELD" JUST TO GET APPLAUSE

On 10/22/23 06:52 AM, this is what Chris Elvidge wrote:
> On 21/10/2023 23:40, Big Al wrote:
>> On 10/21/23 06:23 PM, this is what Mike Easter wrote:
>>> Nic wrote:
>>>> Have I not read at this forum that flatpak=bloat, designed to make installing a package more easy. Sure enough all
>>>> those updates are harbingers of bloat.
>>>
>>> Personally, I prefer to get my packages primarily from the repo/s of the distro, which in the case of Mint include Ub
>>> and Mint repo/s historically.  My next choice would be conventional .deb packaging as a hopefully trustworthy .ppa.
>>>
>>> At a distant 3rd would be some kind of .deb which is not exactly packaged for my specific version of mint/ub but
>>> which might work anyway.  The problem comes what to do after those approaches aren't available. There's the
>>> consideration of .rpm for some other distro.
>>>
>>> One of the reasons the 'fat packs' are considered, which are bloated, is because of the fact that they bring a
>>> sand-boxy environment or are usable across different distros.
>>>
>>> That family includes AppImage, Flatpak, and Snap.  They are 'bloated' compared to .deb/s because of the support they
>>> 'have to' bring along w/ them.
>>>
>>> One can reach the point of 'having to' consider such fat packs when there aren't other alternatives other than
>>> compiling.
>>>
>>> It is easier to use a flatpak, which Mint favors much over Snap, than it is to compile something, so I might use a
>>> flatpak if there were none of my choices which I listed above that.
>>>
>>> I would also consider compiling; because in the past sometimes when I compiled something it worked pretty easily; but
>>> other times it didn't work easily at all.
>>>
>>> So, that's how I 'look at it'.  Nothing is ruled out thru' that plan A B C D list, I would use flatpak and don't
>>> usually enable Snap; but I might use Snap on a live boot of some kind of Ubuntu that was temporary.
>>>
>>>
>> I don't mind appimage.  They are so simple to install and remove.  I just make a launcher and answer yes to put it on
>> the menu.  Only problem is that goes in 'other'.  But oh hey!
>
>
> Edit the newly created .desktop file - probably in $HOME/.local/share/applications - and add/edit a Categories= line.
> Check available Categories= in /usr/share/applications/*.desktop
>
>
>>
>> With disk space now, this 'bloat' isn't much of an issue with me.
>
> Agreed.
>
Hey thanks. I put Categories=AudioVideo; in one of my ~/.local/share/applications files and it moved from other to
Sound/Video. I would have never thought that. I know I tried, I guess I needed the examples in usr/share.
--
Linux Mint 21.2 Cinnamon
Al

On 10/21/23 11:56 AM, this is what Monsieur wrote:
>
> These last few weeks, my Update Manager gets bombarded by updates for Freedesktop Platform, Freedesktop SDK or other
> things, almost everyday.
>
> Anyone knows where this comes from? Is this normal? I have no idea if this is related to a program I have installed or
> how to get rid of them.
>
> Thanks.
>
Just got another one today. flatpak-runtime org.kde.Platform
--
Linux Mint 21.2 Cinnamon
Al

Big Al wrote:
> On 10/21/23 11:56 AM, this is what Monsieur wrote:
>>
>> These last few weeks, my Update Manager gets bombarded by updates for
>> Freedesktop Platform, Freedesktop SDK or other things, almost everyday.
>>
>> Anyone knows where this comes from? Is this normal? I have no idea if
>> this is related to a program I have installed or how to get rid of them.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
> Just got another one today.  flatpak-runtime org.kde.Platform

With the help of an AI search engine, I completely uninstalled flatpak,
including the entire flatpak directory in var/lib. I lost some
interesting programs in the process, but I'll find an alternative for those.

No more flatpak for me. I'm on a metered connection (a very generous
one, but still) and I'm not wasting anymore bandwidth on those daily
freedesktop updates. They're almost as bad as spam.

On 10/22/23 08:40 AM, this is what Monsieur wrote:
> Big Al wrote:
>> On 10/21/23 11:56 AM, this is what Monsieur wrote:
>>>
>>> These last few weeks, my Update Manager gets bombarded by updates for Freedesktop Platform, Freedesktop SDK or other
>>> things, almost everyday.
>>>
>>> Anyone knows where this comes from? Is this normal? I have no idea if this is related to a program I have installed
>>> or how to get rid of them.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>> Just got another one today.  flatpak-runtime org.kde.Platform
>
> With the help of an AI search engine, I completely uninstalled flatpak, including the entire flatpak directory in
> var/lib. I lost some interesting programs in the process, but I'll find an alternative for those.
>
> No more flatpak for me. I'm on a metered connection (a very generous one, but still) and I'm not wasting anymore
> bandwidth on those daily freedesktop updates. They're almost as bad as spam.
>
>
I can understand with a metered connection. Lately there have been a lot of updates.
--
Linux Mint 21.2 Cinnamon
Al

On 2023-10-22, Monsieur <Monsieur@notreal.invalid> wrote:
> Big Al wrote:
>> On 10/21/23 11:56 AM, this is what Monsieur wrote:
>>>
>>> These last few weeks, my Update Manager gets bombarded by updates for
>>> Freedesktop Platform, Freedesktop SDK or other things, almost everyday.
>>>
>>> Anyone knows where this comes from? Is this normal? I have no idea if
>>> this is related to a program I have installed or how to get rid of them.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>> Just got another one today.  flatpak-runtime org.kde.Platform
>
> With the help of an AI search engine, I completely uninstalled flatpak,
> including the entire flatpak directory in var/lib. I lost some
> interesting programs in the process, but I'll find an alternative for those.
>
> No more flatpak for me. I'm on a metered connection (a very generous
> one, but still) and I'm not wasting anymore bandwidth on those daily
> freedesktop updates. They're almost as bad as spam.
>
Flatpak is so Windows and macOS....
>
>
>
>
>

--

7-77-777, Evil Sinner!
https://www.linkedin.com/in/branimir-maksimovic-6762bbaa/