https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c Jiaying ren changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jren@novell.com AssignedTo|bnc-team-screening@forge.pr |mmarek@suse.com |ovo.novell.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c3 Olaf Hering changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mmarek@suse.com Component|Basesystem |libzypp Version|13.1 Milestone 0 |13.1 Milestone 4 AssignedTo|mmarek@suse.com |zypp-maintainers@forge.prov | |o.novell.com --- Comment #3 from Olaf Hering 2013-09-02 20:34:37 CEST --- I suggest libzypp exports some variable so mkinitrd knows its called from within a zypper dup (or whatever) session/transaction. Once that session/transaction is done libzypp could call a mkinitrd-owned helper script which replays the remaining required mkinitrd calls. So in the end mkinitrd is only called once per zypper dup. Reassigning to libzypp maintainers for comments. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c5 --- Comment #5 from Felix Miata 2013-09-03 13:25:30 UTC --- "'313506' is not a feature id... Your query: Find features with '313506' in title or description that are not closed" What is FATE#313506? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c Michael Andres changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #510522|0 |1 is obsolete| | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c7 Michael Andres changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jslaby@suse.com --- Comment #7 from Michael Andres 2013-09-03 16:54:39 CEST --- *** Bug 773575 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=773575 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c9 --- Comment #9 from Felix Miata 2014-03-17 13:07:32 EDT --- Now with mkinitrd being retired it is a dracut inefficiently being called multiple times per update session. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c11 --- Comment #11 from Felix Miata 2014-03-17 14:19:02 EDT --- The behavior I reported in comment 0 still exists. I didn't change the summary, and don't believe changing it was appropriate. The behavior as reported still exists, as evidenced by the number of times dracut fails at upgrades time in bug 866454. I reduce the annoyance somewhat by removing kernels other than the running one myself prior to each zypper dup, and keep a kernel* lock set until after everything else gets updated, but Fedora's yum upgrade seems to have avoided this annoyance since farther back than I can remember. Maybe that has something to do with always downloading all packages and running a transaction test before installing anything and would be a problem for zypper with options alternative to DownloadInAdvance. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c13 Michael Andres changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #13 from Michael Andres 2014-03-18 16:11:53 CET --- (In reply to comment #9)

Now with mkinitrd being retired it is a dracut inefficiently being called multiple times per update session.

Scripts to execute (%pre/%post/%posttrans/..) are part of the packages. libzypp now executes the defined scripts at the correct point in time. It is not up to libzypp to decide whether scripts from different packages are equal/equivalent: %post a %post b echo "HI" echo "HI" ^ ^^ Also zypp can't know whether it would be ok to execute them only once. If there are 100 requests for SCRIPT, we must execute SCRIPT 100 times. SCRIPT should be optimized to be cheap if there is nothing todo, but that's within the scope of the packages using it, not within libzypp. I'm leaving the bug as FIXED (from libzypps POV the original 'called multiple times' issue is INVALID) If dracut isn't fast if there is nothing todo, a bug should be opened for dracut. If it can't be optimized, packages must change the way they use dracut in their scripts. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c15 --- Comment #15 from Ulrich Windl 2014-03-19 08:57:03 CET --- In the past people always thought something cannot be improved until someone did it. For example in older HP-UX a kernel was rebuilt replacing the current kernel when a kernel patch was installed. But still at that time there was a separate "configure" phase in addition to the "installation" phase that caused the kernel to be built only once (in configure phase). More recent versions can even decide whether a module that is patched can be replaced without reboot (unloaded/loaded when it's not used, or if processes that use it can be restarted). Now I hear from SUSE that we'll have to live with things how they presently are, even if those things got worse with recent changes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c16 --- Comment #16 from Michael Schröder 2014-03-19 10:38:00 UTC --- Sure, but you're talking to the wrong people here. From the libzypp side there's nothing more we can do about the posttrans scriptlets. The mechanism to reduce the amount of time spent in posttrans is now in place, it just has to be used by the packages. Please create a new bug about the handling of mkinitrd in the kernel and kmp packages and assign it to the kernel folks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c18 --- Comment #18 from Felix Miata 2014-06-05 23:46:13 EDT --- There is as yet in Factory only marginal evidence this has been improved at all, with a zypper dup causing one run of initrd creation (new initrd for every installed kernel) ending each dup session. -> reopen I precede each zypper dup thus: zypper -v in zypper libzypp libsolv-tools rpm glibc udev systemd dracut That generates rebuilds of initrds for each installed kernel as many as five times, according to how many of the packages listed in comment 0 (in Factory: -mkinitrd; +dracut) have updates available. Developers with their new computers and SSDs might not see this as a problem, but wasted time is considerable with older single core CPUs and spinning storage media. So I'm now setting each initrd immutable to work around this nuisance, which means I'm unlikely to ever discover on my own if this ever really gets fixed. This is made more annoying by the apparent exclusive openSUSE behavior of obliterating all existing functional initrds for every upgrade of the various packages that can affect what an initrd contains. With e.g. *buntu, Rawhide & Cauldron, initrds are generated automatically only at kernel installation time, never rebuilt as an automatic part of a distribution upgrade process. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c20 --- Comment #20 from Felix Miata 2014-06-06 03:31:49 EDT --- So now it's necessary to determine which packages need this fixup. Does a separate bug need to be filed for each, or can we use this bug, at least as a metabug to see to it that the comment 0 complaint is satisfied, maybe CC here maintainers of errant packages? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c22 --- Comment #22 from Felix Miata 2014-06-06 05:46:22 EDT --- (In reply to comment #21)

See comment#17 here and bug#858840#8

Those really don't help much, more or less pointing to each other. The difference is this was filed against basesystem in Factory, which could be fixed, unlike 858840, filed against "update problems" in 12.3 , which would go out of support next month if 13.2's target released hadn't been postponed, and wouldn't make sense to fix unless 13.1 (future Evergreen) and/or Factory get fixed soon, and bringing the fix back to 12.3 would be simple. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c24 Christian Boltz changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED CC| |suse-beta@cboltz.de Resolution|FIXED | --- Comment #24 from Christian Boltz 2014-06-06 12:36:46 CEST --- (In reply to comment #19)

To clarify: Executing %posttrans correctly will _NOT_ cause one run of initrd creation.

The zypp fix only asserts that all %posttrans scripts are collected and executed correctly at the end of the transaction. But if N %posttrans scripts run initrd, it will be exectuted N times.

It's task of the %posttrans script (thus of the package maintainer) to prevent superfluous actions. (e.g. touching an indicator file in each %postinstall and let the %posttrans perform only if the file exists; removing it afterwards)

Are you serious about this? It sounds like "broken by design" to me because it basically means all packages containing a %posttrans script need to be modified. IMHO at least %posttrans scripts that have exactly the same content should be de-duplicated automatically by libzypp. I'd guess this would catch most of the %posttrans scripts we have. And: yes, I'm also aware that it won't catch all duplicates. But it would improve the situation a lot without causing lots of work to the package maintainers. BTW: Even if you don't plan to change this behaviour, it should at least be documented in the wiki. The only page containing posttrans is http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_scriptlet_snippets (well, and "Cron rename") so this sounds like a good place to document it. Reopening to make sure it's documented (or ideally the behaviour gets improved). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786318#c Felix Miata changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |881780 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.