Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (341 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse-factory] The frustration of updating
- From: Peter Poeml <poeml@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 18:46:04 +0100
- Message-id: <20090217174604.GY14919@xxxxxxx>
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 01:05:09PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
That's a good point indeed. I would be nice to arrange delayed deletion
of packages in a way that there's always one previous package version.
Would be highly convenient for manual repair of breakage.
Peter
--
Contact: admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx (a.k.a. ftpadmin@xxxxxxxx)
#opensuse-mirrors on freenode.net
Info: http://en.opensuse.org/Mirror_Infrastructure
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH
Research & Development
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009, Stephan Kulow wrote:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Am Dienstag 27 Januar 2009 schrieb Richard Guenther:
I assume files have "full" names including version and build. So why
not just keep old files around so that old meta-data does not get
invalidated by partial updates?
"Why not just"? It's 14G without source and debuginfo. How many of those
copies do you think our mirrors would prefer to have?
I hope it will be a lot less if we improve on not syncing out identical
packages. But, indeed - "just". It's useful to be able to revert
a package to a previously known good state as well.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's a good point indeed. I would be nice to arrange delayed deletion
of packages in a way that there's always one previous package version.
Would be highly convenient for manual repair of breakage.
Peter
--
Contact: admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx (a.k.a. ftpadmin@xxxxxxxx)
#opensuse-mirrors on freenode.net
Info: http://en.opensuse.org/Mirror_Infrastructure
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH
Research & Development
| < Previous | Next > |