* Volker Kuhlmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Oct 08. 2007 12:37]:
> On Mon 08 Oct 2007 22:11:52 NZDT +1300, Klaus Kaempf wrote:
>
> > It depends on the number of packages. For a normal maintenance update
> > with only a handful of packages, download all is probably a good
> > strategy.
> >
> > With dis
On Mon 08 Oct 2007 22:11:52 NZDT +1300, Klaus Kaempf wrote:
> It depends on the number of packages. For a normal maintenance update
> with only a handful of packages, download all is probably a good
> strategy.
>
> With distribution upgrade (i.e. 10.2->10.3) or factory update with
> hundreds of p
* Igor Jagec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Oct 08. 2007 11:56]:
>
> Do you evaluate extensions for repo priorities?
Yes.
We will certainly have the ability to prioritize repositories in the
future.
Klaus
---
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
-
On Pon, 2007-10-08 at 11:11 +0200, Klaus Kaempf wrote:
> We probably do not want to code, debug, test and maintain two
> different strategies.
I've noticed that I can update my system and run rpmbuild command at the
same time. That's a nice feature :)
> We are evaluating extensions to the curren
Klaus Kaempf escribió:
> Whats the exit strategy if the disk space is not sufficient ?
smart (or rather Python last time I checked) was to SIGSEGV :P
>
> We probably do not want to code, debug, test and maintain two
> different strategies.
>
indeed . mantaining two strategies does not make mu
* Kevin Valko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Oct 08. 2007 05:19]:
> On Thursday 04 October 2007 12:01:47 am Cristian Rodriguez wrote:
> > that is called "transaction", I suspect that there is a good reason why
> > it is not implemented the way you suggest.
>
> Ok, but what is the good reason? I agree that
On Thursday 04 October 2007 12:01:47 am Cristian Rodriguez wrote:
> that is called "transaction", I suspect that there is a good reason why
> it is not implemented the way you suggest.
Ok, but what is the good reason? I agree that Smart is not a good model to
follow due to the weaknesses in pack
Dňa Thursday 04 October 2007 21:07:33 Carlos E. R. ste napísal:
> The Thursday 2007-10-04 at 16:36 +0200, Stanislav Visnovsky wrote:
> >> Remember that till suse 10.0 that was what was done. Yast first
> >> downloaded all, then installed all, then removed or kept (user option)
> >> all files.
> >>
Dňa Friday 05 October 2007 04:13:09 Rajko M. ste napísal:
> On Thursday 04 October 2007 08:33:19 pm Igor Jagec wrote:
> > On Čet, 2007-10-04 at 19:08 -0500, Rajko M. wrote:
> > > On Thursday 04 October 2007 06:35:28 pm Igor Jagec wrote:
> > > > BTW what is the difference between 'zypper update' and
Rajko M. wrote:
On Thursday 04 October 2007 08:33:19 pm Igor Jagec wrote:
On ÄŒet, 2007-10-04 at 19:08 -0500, Rajko M. wrote:
On Thursday 04 October 2007 06:35:28 pm Igor Jagec wrote:
BTW what is the difference between 'zypper update' and 'zypper update
-t package?
'zypper update' == 'zypper
On Thursday 04 October 2007 08:33:19 pm Igor Jagec wrote:
> On Čet, 2007-10-04 at 19:08 -0500, Rajko M. wrote:
> > On Thursday 04 October 2007 06:35:28 pm Igor Jagec wrote:
> > > BTW what is the difference between 'zypper update' and 'zypper update
> > > -t package?
> >
> > 'zypper update' == 'zypp
Igor Jagec escribió:
> On Čet, 2007-10-04 at 19:08 -0500, Rajko M. wrote:
>
>> On Thursday 04 October 2007 06:35:28 pm Igor Jagec wrote:
>>> BTW what is the difference between 'zypper update' and 'zypper update -t
>>> package?
>> 'zypper update' == 'zypper update -t patch'
>
> Meaning, the patch
On Čet, 2007-10-04 at 19:08 -0500, Rajko M. wrote:
> On Thursday 04 October 2007 06:35:28 pm Igor Jagec wrote:
> > BTW what is the difference between 'zypper update' and 'zypper update -t
> > package?
> 'zypper update' == 'zypper update -t patch'
Meaning, the patch option pulls delta rpms? I saw
On Thursday 04 October 2007 06:35:28 pm Igor Jagec wrote:
...
> BTW what is the difference between 'zypper update' and 'zypper update -t
> package?
'zypper update' == 'zypper update -t patch'
> Which one of these 2 commands is used by GNOME/KDE update
> applet?
Whatever is for patches :-)
> I
On Čet, 2007-10-04 at 14:40 +0200, Stanislav Visnovsky wrote:
> Dňa Thursday 04 October 2007 14:27:20 Igor Jagec ste napísal:
> > Me too. I must say I didn't figure what's the purpose of that approach.
> > For instance, Yum also downloads all the packages first, then updates
> > them. Since I'm st
On Čet, 2007-10-04 at 14:52 +0200, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
> On 2007-10-04 14:27:20 +0200, Igor Jagec wrote:
> > Me too. I must say I didn't figure what's the purpose of that approach.
> > For instance, Yum also downloads all the packages first, then updates
> > them. Since I'm still officially a F
On Čet, 2007-10-04 at 14:40 +0200, Stanislav Visnovsky wrote:
> Dňa Thursday 04 October 2007 14:27:20 Igor Jagec ste napísal:
> > Me too. I must say I didn't figure what's the purpose of that approach.
> > For instance, Yum also downloads all the packages first, then updates
> > them. Since I'm st
Ludwig Nussel escribió:
> He is right, but only in YOU mode. In YOU mode first all packages
> where downloaded, then all deltas applied, finally all packages got
> installed.
Yes, but was not a transaction the way yum or smart do ;)
---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Thursday 2007-10-04 at 16:36 +0200, Stanislav Visnovsky wrote:
Remember that till suse 10.0 that was what was done. Yast first downloaded
all, then installed all, then removed or kept (user option) all files.
The point is to reinstate the old
Stanislav Visnovsky wrote:
> Dňa Thursday 04 October 2007 16:24:43 Carlos E. R. ste napísal:
> > The Thursday 2007-10-04 at 10:00 -0300, Gabriel . wrote:
> > >> I agree that on a running system, this is not the most effective
> > >> approach. What needs to be determined is to figure out how much sp
On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 16:36 +0200, Stanislav Visnovsky wrote:
> Dňa Thursday 04 October 2007 16:24:43 Carlos E. R. ste napísal:
> > The Thursday 2007-10-04 at 10:00 -0300, Gabriel . wrote:
> > >> I agree that on a running system, this is not the most effective
> > >> approach. What needs to be dete
Dňa Thursday 04 October 2007 16:24:43 Carlos E. R. ste napísal:
> The Thursday 2007-10-04 at 10:00 -0300, Gabriel . wrote:
> >> I agree that on a running system, this is not the most effective
> >> approach. What needs to be determined is to figure out how much space
> >> you can spare to download
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Thursday 2007-10-04 at 10:00 -0300, Gabriel . wrote:
I agree that on a running system, this is not the most effective approach.
What needs to be determined is to figure out how much space you can spare to
download the packages and this is not v
Dňa Thursday 04 October 2007 15:00:44 Gabriel . ste napísal:
> 2007/10/4, Stanislav Visnovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > The most important feature for download and install is that you can
> > operate under very restricted situations, e.g. disk and memory
> > requirements.
> >
> > I agree that on a r
2007/10/4, Stanislav Visnovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The most important feature for download and install is that you can operate
> under very restricted situations, e.g. disk and memory requirements.
>
> I agree that on a running system, this is not the most effective approach.
> What needs to be
On 2007-10-04 14:27:20 +0200, Igor Jagec wrote:
> On Čet, 2007-10-04 at 07:48 -0300, Gabriel wrote:
>
> > Cristian Rodriguez escribió:
> > >> First download all
> > >> packages (keeping them on a special location), and after finishing the
> > >> download, install them.
> > > that is called "tran
Dňa Thursday 04 October 2007 14:27:20 Igor Jagec ste napísal:
> On Čet, 2007-10-04 at 07:48 -0300, Gabriel wrote:
> > Cristian Rodriguez escribió:
> > >> First download all
> > >> packages (keeping them on a special location), and after finishing the
> > >> download, install them.
> > >
> > > that
On Čet, 2007-10-04 at 07:48 -0300, Gabriel wrote:
> Cristian Rodriguez escribió:
> >> First download all
> >> packages (keeping them on a special location), and after finishing the
> >> download, install them.
> > that is called "transaction", I suspect that there is a good reason why
> > it is
Cristian Rodriguez escribió:
>
>> IMHO, using the 'smart' approach would be better.
>
> No, you end having almost the same problem.. We have explained this many
> times, smart is **no** model to follow for a package manager, it is
> inconsistent and it does **not work** properly in 64 bit.
I'm n
El Jueves, 4 de Octubre de 2007 06:01:47 Cristian Rodriguez escribió:
> Gabriel . escribió:
> > IMHO, using the 'smart' approach would be better.
>
> No, you end having almost the same problem.. We have explained this many
> times, smart is **no** model to follow for a package manager, it is
> inc
Gabriel . escribió:
> IMHO, using the 'smart' approach would be better.
No, you end having almost the same problem.. We have explained this many
times, smart is **no** model to follow for a package manager, it is
inconsistent and it does **not work** properly in 64 bit.
> First download all
> p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Wednesday 2007-10-03 at 19:28 -0300, Gabriel . wrote:
This will be a little enhancement for 11.0.
On current versions, using zypper to update is a bit dangerous when a
lot of packages are involved. For instance, zypper install the new
packages
Maybe you are already thinking on it, but I didn't read any comments about it.
This will be a little enhancement for 11.0.
On current versions, using zypper to update is a bit dangerous when a
lot of packages are involved. For instance, zypper install the new
packages removing the old one immedia
33 matches
Mail list logo
