Upgrading openmediavault package 6.0.7-1 -> 6.0.8-1 wants to remove sddm and task-kde-desktop #1186
Comments
|
This is by intention. We decided to prevent users from installing OMV on desktop environments because of the huge support maintenance in the forum and all the problems that arise of this setup. OMV is not ment to be installed in parallel with a desktop environment because both try to setup the network and other problematic issues. |
|
Oh my God that is annoying. I'm going to have to explain this to my friend now thanks to this stupid descision as we have a similar NAS setup. We both have running NASses and occasionally use it for a destkop. Why control HOW people use the software? This is just rediculous and controlling, I hate it, makes me want to fork! You already have to install it on Debian and not Ubuntu that is enough of a control for me and I get that. But now you can't even install it on a Desktop OS? that is control! Think about existing installs, lots of users suddenly have to uninstall their desktop environments? they would be annoyed or even furious. Since I have a working installation people rely on in the house, and so does my friend, I might have to lock the package version to 6.0.7-1 for now until I decide how to run this in a VM. I should have run it in a VM from the start, but I had no idea I would have my desktop taken away by a piece of software! how rude. I'm actually very annoyed at this. |
|
I didn't even know there was a support forum. I never ever clomplained about it. I have myself and my friend using it and we just been screwed over by this descision, the both of us. I'm super annoyed at this. |
|
We have always recommend against installing OMV on a desktop because the desktop does things that conflict with OMV. OMV is designed to be a headless NAS. If you need an occasion desktop, buy an RPi.
Because OMV can break when a desktop is installed. If you supported OMV, you would know that. Making sure there is no desktop installed will fix many issues.
This isn't control. OMV requires certain package versions and Ubuntu and Debian use different versions. I am a huge Ubuntu fan myself but it would be difficult to support Ubuntu and Debian.
I'm sorry you are so angry but we do this in our free time and volunteer this time. Not allowing a desktop will make supporting OMV just that much easier because of the hard to diagnose problems desktops have. |
|
Yep and I am about to go back to work, tomorrow. And I have to scacrifice my free time to rectify this decision because my friend will be calling me up about it. I guess my last word of advice would be "never break existing installations". If you want to enforce a change like "no desktop" then do it in the next major version like 7.0, don't break existing installations on people half way through. I see in the forum others are reporting this too, expect a lot more fallout in the forums from this I think. You're trying to solve a problem in the forum and it generates another. |
|
OMV 6.x has not been released yet. So, this should not have had to wait until OMV 7.x. This is not breaking any OMV 5.x installs. Changing frameworks breaks old plugins too but that is what happens when a product changes. Do you yell at Microsoft when a game stops working on a new version of Windows? You have to sacrifice a few hours. I have "sacrificed" many, many more hours because of omv installed on desktops that users neglect to mention. And maybe you should look at the change a little more carefully. It is only preventing the installation of a display manager not a desktop environment. |
|
Not so easy if you have hardware that requires Debian 11, you're forced to run it on 6.x then. |
|
What hardware? The standard Debian 11 kernel is the same kernel as the backports Debian 10 kernel. |
|
Fyi if people do their software updates in the GUI and the display manager gets uninstalled while it's running ... bad things happen. It can break the installation. Yes you can fix it in a command like using apt install -f, but still removing a display manager has consequences. |
|
2.5gbe realtek, but tomorrow it will be 12th gen Intel CPUs. The point is locking a version to a specific Debian version doesn't always work for people if they intend to run the latest hardware. |
I know exactly what it does. And that is because a standard debian install uses a desktop environment task. Part of the task dependencies is a display manager. All the display manager does is start the desktop environment.
It is hard to support a bleeding edge desktop board with Debian since it is meant to be very stable. The 2.5GBe realtek adapter can work with older kernels as well. And if you think you can make OMV support multiple debian versions, please submit the pull request. You will find it is harder than you think. Just try to remember that Volker supports OMV by himself. I support omv-extras plugins by myself. There is only so much time we have without help. |
|
I have had some experience what happens when sddm gets uninstalled in the middle of a desktop session. It tears down the display manager instantly and leaves the packages in a broken state because the apt install is ended prematurely. Anyway going a bit OT, this is a better way for rtl8125 (not rtl8156) but I'm pretty sure it covers both https://github.com/awesometic/realtek-r8125-dkms Right now I have an existing installation and it's easier to just stay on 6.0.7 or rebuild the deb. |
|
Is the OMV box the only computer you have and that is why you need a desktop environment? I'm just really trying to understand the need for a destkop environment on the OMV box. Plenty of people use docker to install a desktop environment to RDP/VNC/browser into to do file management things. I understand this requires a second system but it works very well. The only option to force a display manager to not be installed is to uninstall network-manager and disable disk automount instead (these are the two biggest things that break OMV). But I don't think people would like that either. |
|
I was really just trying to understand the need here but you gave me the thumbs down. I will stop now. |
|
It just seems like you're trying to talk me out of my setup that works for me, a setup I'm happy with. I don't have issues with network manager and automount issues I've only seen with remote drives, I don't use remote drives on the NAS itself. I don't want to use VNC for the desktop, I want to be able to hop on there and use the desktop on real hardware, is that so much to ask for. Apparently so. |
|
@votdev Since I am really tired of this desktop situation already, what would you think about the following instead of display manager conflict?
|
I'm not trying to talk you out of it. I was trying to understand the use case and suggesting alternatives. I was looking for a compromise that works for you AND makes my life a little easier. Is it too much to ask for something that makes my life supporting users easier? |
|
Yeah sorry I get that. I just don't think forcing the openmediavault package to uninstall all display managers is a good answer. |
|
Well then you tell me what the right solution is for someone who insists on having a desktop installed against our recommendations but has either of these problems: If a user plugs in a new usb drive, it gets automounted. Then the user goes to the filesystem tab and sees it is mounted. They don't understand why they can't select that drive in the Shared Folder. OR A user configures their network adapter in the OMV web interface for a dhcp address. Their system is acting weird because it has two ip addresses and dns is broken. |
|
I'm not sure because I don't do either of those. I don't connect USB drives to my NAS and I use nmtui to set the static IP address. I just feel that because some people do this, others are being punished with "no you can't have a desktop anymore ... sorry". |
|
First, i'm sorry about your current situation.
Please note that all maintenance cases because of side-by-side installations also cost the forum moderators their free time to fix issues that arise of this not supported setups.
We are doing that, OMV6 is still in beta and not official released. |
You are not doing that, but many other people are doing that and wonder why their setup does not work as expected. @ryecoaaron explained the problem very well in an earlier comment. From our experience with the user comments in the forum we decided to go that way for OMV6. @ryecoaaron improved the install script for SBC some time ago, i updated the Debian package control file later after fighting with an issue several hours until it came out that the user has a desktop environment. That was the final reason to go that route and prevent such installations. Please note, all forum moderators, @ryecoaaron and myself are using our free time to get this project running and help other users. I think it's understandable that we're looking for solutions to avoid wasting time unnecessarily by limiting such maintenance issues. This will also prevent the user from bad experiences with OMV. Second, OMV is not designed to be installed in parallel to a desktop environment from beginning. Since OMV6 is in beta every user should be aware of that things might change. Maybe the communication was bad that there is a breaking change, but i have adapted to blog post immediately (but i am sure nobody will read and care about it). I'm sorry for that. After your experience the only thing we need to do is to harden the upgrade path; notify users that an upgrade from OMV5 to OMV6 is not possible with a desktop environment installed. This should help to prevent users from running into the same situation. |
Disabling a service can easily be undone; finally we are in the same situation to have forum requests and tracker issues with problems that come from unsupported installations.
Adapting the UI code (+ complete backend) for unsupported setups is something i do not want to see in OMV. |
…installations with a desktop environment. Fixes: #1186 Relates: #1175 Relates: https://github.com/OpenMediaVault-Plugin-Developers/installScript/blob/master/install#L30 Signed-off-by: Volker Theile <votdev@gmx.de>
|
OK moving on, just wanted to mention I remember network manager being the default as well when I was using armbian so I think network manager possibly isn't quite exclusive to desktop but could also be on armbian? but don't quote me on that. I think I recall once seeing that network manager issue you are talking about on armbian on my old helios4 nas, and then I just started using armbian-config to set a static IP address instead of doing it in openmediavault from that point onwards (and on debian I would use nmtui). So I guess the networking page could either communicate with network manager itself on those network manager based installs. And on other server installs directly edit /etc/network/intefaces, but it sounds like you're not up for supporting a dual code path like that. |
|
In the last few years, if you install OMV on Ambian using armbian-config or the install script, network-manager is removed - https://github.com/OpenMediaVault-Plugin-Developers/installScript/blob/master/install#L488 OMV uses netplan (like Ubuntu). And while netplan can use network-manager on the backend, you could still have conflicts if someone configured things from the desktop. OMV uses its database to store network info. Maintaining that database while allowing changes from the desktop would be very difficult to maintain. OMV works just fine with network configured from network-manager provided you don't setup anything in the interfaces tab. And while you may know to do that, noobs do not. People who know not to do that are a very small percentage. |
Well, had you installed as recommended the first time, you wouldn't have any issues (it has ALWAYS been in the installation instructions not to install a desktop.. since literally the first time I installed OMV pre 1.0). Only person to blame is yourself |
|
@ken8521 I thought we'd ended this thread but you are flaring it back up, why?
OK so the download page is the only page that says 5.x is stable and 6.x is testing, but NOWHERE on the download page is a hint: don't install this on a desktop. And what CMS is being used to make the URLs so akward ?page_id=77 should be /download ?page_id=77 is madness. But on the upside after all this a blog post has been added warning of 6.0.8 uninstalling your desktop. Still, not putting it on the download page means people will miss it. Most people don't read the blog and go straight to the download page I would have thought. |
This is the real problem. Unless the filename had do-not-install-on-desktop in it, there are still people who would never see the note. It would take pages of notes to list all the things you shouldn't install OMV on. In the server admin world, it is very rare to see a desktop environment installed. It adds many more attack vectors. The OMV iso does not install a desktop either. https://openmediavault.readthedocs.io/en/5.x/faq.html?highlight=desktop#faq Volker has said many times that sourceforge will show the stable version. If you choose to look through what is available, you can not assume that is a stable version. He does not want to put beta or rc in the filename because it could turn out to be the released version. |
@robvdl that is a wrong impression, just another installation approach (docker container) has to be used to have a GUI. |
|
@votdev I'd fear the current warning text is misleading users. |
I have an existing installation of openmediavault running on Debian 11, nothing much else on there except I did pick KDE desktop during the install.
The other day the 6.0.8 package got released and I can't upgrade to it:
Upon closer inspection (I used 'apt install openmediavault') it tells me it wants to uninstall part of my KDE? why?
Must be a change in the 6.0.8-1 package, 6.0.7-1 didn't have this issue. I don't understand why openmediavault wants to uninstall my current display manager sddm, it should have nothing to do with the display manager at all...
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: