On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 00:25 -0500, seth vidal wrote: > On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 13:40 -0500, James Antill wrote: > > . What about including the B/s, is that worth killing 11 bytes from the > > name and/or bar? > > not so thrilled about rates, personally. Just adds clutter. And, > honestly, adding things like this to the text interface is probably just > masochism. If people want more output and more information doesn't it > make more sense to use yumex?
Well I almost always use the "yum" interface, and I don't see that changing anytime soon. So my hope is just to make the cmd line interface awesome :) > in short, while this is all fine and good, is it really worth adding > code for? Well I've often found myself wanting it in two cases: . I really want the ETA for all the data to be downloaded ... and the way I've usually worked this out is by trying to do the B/s by hand, and then figuring out how much data is left to get. Getting the B/s automatically would cut out a lot of the pain here. . I want to know if the net connection has died or slowed down considerably. The way I usually do this is to watch the ETA time but that only works if you know what it should be, or has been recently. ...with the patch I posted we could only have the B/s in the current download, and leave it out of the previous downloads to reduce the clutter. -- James Antill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Red Hat
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Yum-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel
