Stanislav Maslovski stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 10:00:40AM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stanislav Maslovski
stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com wrote:
This is possible, however, it is an extra busy work for a user. In any
case,
Peter Samuelson pe...@p12n.org writes:
[Simon Chopin]
But I believe what Stanislas mean is to unpack while downloading the
rest of the packages. I often wondered why it wasn't the case, but
I've assumed so far that there was probably a reason I just could not
think of :)
I think it is
On Sat, 2011-02-05 at 14:40 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Stanislav Maslovski stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 10:00:40AM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stanislav Maslovski
stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com wrote:
This is
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 01:21:07AM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
#include hallo.h
* Stanislav Maslovski [Fri, Feb 04 2011, 03:10:54AM]:
Hi debian-devel,
I wanted to ask this for quite a long time: Does aptitude (I think
apt-get does the same) really have to lock the status database area
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stanislav Maslovski
stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com wrote:
This is possible, however, it is an extra busy work for a user. In any
case, I think that holding a lock only for downloading is an overkill
and this can be relaxed.
What if you would launch two
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 03:29:14AM +0100, Julian Taylor wrote:
On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 03:10 +0300, Stanislav Maslovski wrote:
For example, I am running an update on a slow connection and want to
uninstall or install with dpkg a few packages while the others are
being downloaded. Should not
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 10:00:40AM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stanislav Maslovski
stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com wrote:
This is possible, however, it is an extra busy work for a user. In any
case, I think that holding a lock only for downloading is an
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 10:00:40AM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stanislav Maslovski
stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com wrote:
This is possible, however, it is an extra busy work for a user. In any
case, I think that holding a lock only for downloading is an
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 6:57 AM, Stanislav Maslovski
stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
If you want to have that level of control, why don't you just check it
manually? Use --download-only with apt-get (no dpkg locking this way)
and when it's done, use apt-get without it to install the
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 01:10, Stanislav Maslovski
stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com wrote:
For example, I am running an update on a slow connection and want to
uninstall or install with dpkg a few packages while the others are
being downloaded. Should not this be possible? I understand that there
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Fernando Lemos fernando...@gmail.com wrote:
This is possible, however, it is an extra busy work for a user. In any
case, I think that holding a lock only for downloading is an overkill
and this can be relaxed.
As far as I can tell (and please correct me if I'm
On Friday 04 February 2011 12.47:21 Fernando Lemos wrote:
do, say, an apt-get upgrade, apt prepares an upgrade plan that
uses a given set of packages. If apt wouldn't lock [...]
new plan would have to be created, the user would
have to be asked for confirmation again. Doesn't sound that great.
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 09:47:21AM -0200, Fernando Lemos wrote:
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 6:57 AM, Stanislav Maslovski
stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
If you want to have that level of control, why don't you just check it
manually? Use --download-only with apt-get (no dpkg locking
Hi !
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 09:47:21AM -0200, Fernando Lemos wrote:
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 6:57 AM, Stanislav Maslovski
[...]
As Julian Taylor mentioned, there is also another side of the same
problem: aptitude itself can be improved so that it is able to
download and unpack in parallel.
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Simon Chopin
chopin.si...@googlemail.com wrote:
[...]
As Julian Taylor mentioned, there is also another side of the same
problem: aptitude itself can be improved so that it is able to
download and unpack in parallel. If it were doing this then the lock
would
[Simon Chopin]
But I believe what Stanislas mean is to unpack while downloading the
rest of the packages. I often wondered why it wasn't the case, but
I've assumed so far that there was probably a reason I just could not
think of :)
I think it is because, in the general case, it is not at
Hi debian-devel,
I wanted to ask this for quite a long time: Does aptitude (I think
apt-get does the same) really have to lock the status database area
when _downloading_ packages?
For example, I am running an update on a slow connection and want to
uninstall or install with dpkg a few packages
#include hallo.h
* Stanislav Maslovski [Fri, Feb 04 2011, 03:10:54AM]:
Hi debian-devel,
I wanted to ask this for quite a long time: Does aptitude (I think
apt-get does the same) really have to lock the status database area
when _downloading_ packages?
For example, I am running an update on
On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 03:10 +0300, Stanislav Maslovski wrote:
Hi debian-devel,
I wanted to ask this for quite a long time: Does aptitude (I think
apt-get does the same) really have to lock the status database area
when _downloading_ packages?
For example, I am running an update on a slow
19 matches
Mail list logo
