January 2009 - openSUSE Features - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[openFate 303367] Better Beagle Acceptance
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Jan '09

18 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Sebastian Rösgen (palimpseste) Feature #303367, revision 13 Title: Better Beagle Acceptance openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Gary Ekker <gekker(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-05-27 09:03:27 reject reason: Not done for 11.0. Priority Requester: Mandatory Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.1: Done Priority Requester: Mandatory Projectmanager: Important Requested by: Andreas Jaeger (a_jaeger) + Interested: Sebastian Rösgen (palimpseste) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: There have been several discussions on the public openSUSE mailing lists, e.g. http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2008-01/msg00157.html where people complain about resource usage or garbage from beagle. I suggest that we analyze the current situation and check where are real problems and consider solutions. One option would be to make it easier for users to not enable beagle on their systems. Note: The feature request is about getting a better acceptance by our users of our indexing technology - and therefore let's figure out what are the problems they are hitting in real life. References: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=282678 Discussion: #1: Andreas Jaeger (a_jaeger) (2008-01-20 11:12:58) See also bug 282678. #2: Andreas Jaeger (a_jaeger) (2008-01-23 16:23:51) Note: powertop advises "Suggestion: Disable or remove 'beagle' from your system. Beagle is the program that indexes for easy desktop search, however it's not very efficient and costs a significant amount of battery life.". #3: JP Rosevear (jproseve) (2008-01-23 10:38:58) (reply to #2) Yes, this is well known and was covered extensively last year and caused by polling for battery status in some cases. 0.3.2 uses hal to detect battery status: http://www.mail-archive.com/dashboard-hackers@gnome.org/msg03464.html #4: JP Rosevear (jproseve) (2008-01-23 10:41:35) (reply to #3) Also part of it was a mono issue: http://www.nabble.com/Beagle-indexing-when-running-on-batteries-td13842939.… -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=303367

1 0

[openFate 304937] Wireless dynamic WEP connection with 802.1x authentication in Yast/sysconfig
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Jan '09

18 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Sebastian Rösgen (palimpseste) Feature #304937, revision 7 Title: Wireless dynamic WEP connection with 802.1x authentication in Yast/sysconfig openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-07-29 15:43:08 reject reason: This cannot be done in time for openSUSE 11.1. Priority Requester: Important openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Helmut Schaa (hschaa) Interested: Christian Zoz (zoz) Interested: Guy Lunardi (glunardi) Interested: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) Interested: Marcus Kraft (marcuskraft) Interested: Matthias Eckermann (mge1512) Interested: Michal Zugec (mzugec) + Interested: Sebastian Rösgen (palimpseste) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Yast/sysconfig does already support WPA-EAP wireless connections but is missing support for dynamic WEP connections using 802.1x authentication. wpa_supplicant is able to start such a connection with a network block which uses key_mgmt=IEEE8021X instead of key_mgmt=WPA- EAP. Example: network={ ssid=xxx key_mgmt=IEEE8021X eap=TTLS identity=xxx password=xxx ... } Based on bug #380671 comment #16 and #19. Discussion: -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=304937

1 0

[openFate 305147] Wizard mode for Network Card configuration (in YaST)
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Jan '09

18 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Sebastian Rösgen (palimpseste) Feature #305147, revision 4 Title: Wizard mode for Network Card configuration (in YaST) openSUSE-11.2: New Priority Requester: Neutral Requested by: Michal Zugec (mzugec) + Interested: Sebastian Rösgen (palimpseste) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: (based on "Internet/Intranet with external Router" in suse-beta-e) It seems some users don't know how to setup the SuSEfirewall correctly. Especially, they don't know if they should setup a network card as internal or external device. If a network card is found, YaST should ask for its usage (local network or directly connected to the internet?) - every user should know. With this information the firewall setup can be done in a useful way. See bugzilla https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=67415 -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305147

1 0

[openFate 305634] Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Jan '09

18 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Sebastian Rösgen (palimpseste) Feature #305634, revision 27 Title: Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Mandatory Requested by: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) Interested: Andre Duffeck (aduffeck) Interested: Bernhard Friedreich (bernhard1234) Interested: Bruno Friedmann (bruno_friedmann) Interested: Francis Giannaros (apokryphos) Interested: Guy Lunardi (glunardi) Interested: Joe Brockmeier (jbrockmeier) Interested: JP Rosevear (jproseve) Interested: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) Interested: Mario Carrion (mariocarrion) Interested: Markus K (kamikazow) Interested: Matthias Eckermann (mge1512) Interested: Maxi Schimmel (maxxs) Interested: Richard Weinberger (derrichard) Interested: Robert Davies (robopensuse) + Interested: Sebastian Rösgen (palimpseste) Interested: Stefan Behlert (sbehlert) Interested: Stephan Binner (beineri) Interested: Stephan Kulow (coolo) Interested: Thorsten Kukuk (kukuk) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: With the 11.2 cycle, we want to offer users the ability to perform a live system upgrade in the manner of Debian's dist-upgrade. For the purpose of this cycle, we want to support dist-upgrade from the previous version (11.1) only, as this is a sufficiently complicated problem as is. From the user's view, the difference is between being able to update the system incrementally within the given version or service pack running, to being ble to migrate with a system command ("zypper dup" or similar) to a higher version altogether. In the Debian experience, the set of base distributions is not necessarily limited, but it has been Ubuntu's practice to define what starting points other than "release n-1" are allowed (for instance, all LTS versions are purported to be able to "apt dist-upgrade" to the top of the line, although I have heard of problems trying to jump two years - 6.06->8.10 - in a fell swoop in this manner :-). In the openSUSE scope, we should aim to be able to "dup" between incremental versions, starting from 11.1 to 11.2, and later 11.x to 12.0. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: With the introduction of the Zypper stack to SLE, we finally reached the state of a featureful (which YOU was not) and fast, reliable (which ZLM was not) update stack in the platform. For enterprise use, some tweaks are still desirable (changelogs, rollback, ...) which we are looking at, as well as improvements on the Enterprise management front, which we are working on with our SRM colleagues. The only really significant competitive feature we are missing at this point is the Debian/Ubuntu dist-upgrade functionality, which has a powerful psychological impact at the Enterprise level and a much more tangible impact at the small user / single user level: many with no IT department do use Ubuntu these days on the basis that "chasing" Fedora and openSUSE along the six-month upgrade cycle is too much for them, and feel they can save time on Ubuntu with the combination of dist- upgrade and the longer LTS cycle. The rationale for pursuing this is to revoke the special status of coolness this functionality gives Ubuntu, and to terminate the negative influence that may have on our SLE sales (from the expert's personal opinion, the preference then easily spills into purchasing). Discussion: #1: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) (2009-01-07 20:42:15) This is the #1 feature in the systems management scope for 11.2 - I have no doubt it will be fun :-) #4: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2009-01-09 11:32:53) Passing to mls for technical evaluation (solver + autobuild) #5: Michael Schröder (mlschroe) (2009-01-09 12:48:10) Any hint on what features are currently missing? #6: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2009-01-09 13:30:57) (reply to #5) From the top of my head: How to handle * Library ABI changes (e.g. major gcc/g++ upgrades) ? * Core package changes (e.g. devs.rpm to udev) ? * Kernel changes (if application/deamons need a specific kernel abi, dbus comes into mind) ? * Failure handling (network breakdown, package update errors, ...) ? * Booting of the new kernel ? #7: Michael Schröder (mlschroe) (2009-01-09 14:45:09) (reply to #6) And debian does this in some way? #8: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-01-17 12:43:42) (reply to #7) The distupgrade feature differs from changing source list and doing upgrade, so some utility process could be started. They may require some documented procedure to be followed, for "tough" changes. But ABI change, how long since ELF/glibc was introduced? C++ ABI ought not be relevant for upgrade process, they are "just" applications and libaries to be updated. Failure handling - you are told to back up your system first, it is "best effort" not guaranteed. The less you have installed the more likely it is to succeed. Debian offer choice of kernels, this may "punt" the problem to a user controlled install and select from GRUB menu. Debian have apt-cache possibility, to create central pool of packages, to decrease liklihood of network troubles, as well as huge number CD and DVD iso's. #9: Thorsten Kukuk (kukuk) (2009-01-17 15:24:35) (reply to #8) The glibc internal ABI changes frequently. Means, running applications will continue to use the old glibc with the old ABI, but installed are already the new plugins => running applications can crash. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305634

1 0

[openFate 305535] Improve samba yast modules
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Jan '09

18 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Sebastian Rösgen (palimpseste) Feature #305535, revision 4 Title: Improve samba yast modules openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Important Requested by: James McDonough (jmcdough) Interested: Jiří Suchomel (jsuchome) Interested: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) + Interested: Sebastian Rösgen (palimpseste) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Improve the design of the yast samba modules. More details to come. References: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444603 Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Many customers report difficulties with various areas of samba yast administration, both with new features requested and layout of current ones. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305535

1 0

[openFate 305634] Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Jan '09

18 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Richard Weinberger (derRichard) Feature #305634, revision 26 Title: Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Mandatory Requested by: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) Interested: Andre Duffeck (aduffeck) Interested: Bernhard Friedreich (bernhard1234) Interested: Bruno Friedmann (bruno_friedmann) Interested: Francis Giannaros (apokryphos) Interested: Guy Lunardi (glunardi) Interested: Joe Brockmeier (jbrockmeier) Interested: JP Rosevear (jproseve) Interested: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) Interested: Mario Carrion (mariocarrion) Interested: Markus K (kamikazow) Interested: Matthias Eckermann (mge1512) Interested: Maxi Schimmel (maxxs) + Interested: Richard Weinberger (derrichard) Interested: Robert Davies (robopensuse) Interested: Stefan Behlert (sbehlert) Interested: Stephan Binner (beineri) Interested: Stephan Kulow (coolo) Interested: Thorsten Kukuk (kukuk) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: With the 11.2 cycle, we want to offer users the ability to perform a live system upgrade in the manner of Debian's dist-upgrade. For the purpose of this cycle, we want to support dist-upgrade from the previous version (11.1) only, as this is a sufficiently complicated problem as is. From the user's view, the difference is between being able to update the system incrementally within the given version or service pack running, to being ble to migrate with a system command ("zypper dup" or similar) to a higher version altogether. In the Debian experience, the set of base distributions is not necessarily limited, but it has been Ubuntu's practice to define what starting points other than "release n-1" are allowed (for instance, all LTS versions are purported to be able to "apt dist-upgrade" to the top of the line, although I have heard of problems trying to jump two years - 6.06->8.10 - in a fell swoop in this manner :-). In the openSUSE scope, we should aim to be able to "dup" between incremental versions, starting from 11.1 to 11.2, and later 11.x to 12.0. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: With the introduction of the Zypper stack to SLE, we finally reached the state of a featureful (which YOU was not) and fast, reliable (which ZLM was not) update stack in the platform. For enterprise use, some tweaks are still desirable (changelogs, rollback, ...) which we are looking at, as well as improvements on the Enterprise management front, which we are working on with our SRM colleagues. The only really significant competitive feature we are missing at this point is the Debian/Ubuntu dist-upgrade functionality, which has a powerful psychological impact at the Enterprise level and a much more tangible impact at the small user / single user level: many with no IT department do use Ubuntu these days on the basis that "chasing" Fedora and openSUSE along the six-month upgrade cycle is too much for them, and feel they can save time on Ubuntu with the combination of dist- upgrade and the longer LTS cycle. The rationale for pursuing this is to revoke the special status of coolness this functionality gives Ubuntu, and to terminate the negative influence that may have on our SLE sales (from the expert's personal opinion, the preference then easily spills into purchasing). Discussion: #1: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) (2009-01-07 20:42:15) This is the #1 feature in the systems management scope for 11.2 - I have no doubt it will be fun :-) #4: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2009-01-09 11:32:53) Passing to mls for technical evaluation (solver + autobuild) #5: Michael Schröder (mlschroe) (2009-01-09 12:48:10) Any hint on what features are currently missing? #6: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2009-01-09 13:30:57) (reply to #5) From the top of my head: How to handle * Library ABI changes (e.g. major gcc/g++ upgrades) ? * Core package changes (e.g. devs.rpm to udev) ? * Kernel changes (if application/deamons need a specific kernel abi, dbus comes into mind) ? * Failure handling (network breakdown, package update errors, ...) ? * Booting of the new kernel ? #7: Michael Schröder (mlschroe) (2009-01-09 14:45:09) (reply to #6) And debian does this in some way? #8: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-01-17 12:43:42) (reply to #7) The distupgrade feature differs from changing source list and doing upgrade, so some utility process could be started. They may require some documented procedure to be followed, for "tough" changes. But ABI change, how long since ELF/glibc was introduced? C++ ABI ought not be relevant for upgrade process, they are "just" applications and libaries to be updated. Failure handling - you are told to back up your system first, it is "best effort" not guaranteed. The less you have installed the more likely it is to succeed. Debian offer choice of kernels, this may "punt" the problem to a user controlled install and select from GRUB menu. Debian have apt-cache possibility, to create central pool of packages, to decrease liklihood of network troubles, as well as huge number CD and DVD iso's. #9: Thorsten Kukuk (kukuk) (2009-01-17 15:24:35) (reply to #8) The glibc internal ABI changes frequently. Means, running applications will continue to use the old glibc with the old ABI, but installed are already the new plugins => running applications can crash. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305634

1 0

[openFate 304879] OOo: Update of KDE integration to KDE4
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Jan '09

18 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Johann-Nikolaus Andreae (jnandreae) Feature #304879, revision 21 Title: OOo: Update of KDE integration to KDE4 openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by JP Rosevear <jpr(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-08-15 11:47:35 reject reason: As per PM recommendation. Priority Requester: Mandatory Projectmanager: Important Requested by: Stephan Binner (beineri) Interested: Bernhard Friedreich (bernhard1234) + Interested: Johann-Nikolaus Andreae (jnandreae) Interested: Markus K (kamikazow) Interested: Maxi Schimmel (maxxs) Interested: Ruchir Brahmbhatt (ruchir) Interested: Stephan Kulow (coolo) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: The current OOo KDE integration (file dialogs, addressbook, interface/icon theme,...) is based on KDE3. As openSUSE 11.1/SLED 11 will likely not include KDE3 anymore it has to be upgraded to KDE4. Discussion: #1: Stephan Kulow (coolo) (2008-06-13 09:54:23) There are far too many mandatory OOo features. Please reevaluate - it's unlikely that we won't ship KDE3 apps in SLED11 #2: Dirk Mueller (dirkmueller) (2008-06-13 13:25:48) (reply to #1) we will ship KDE3 libs, yes. that doesn't mean that we desire to have KDE3 app dependencies ;) #7: Rajesh Ganesan (ganesanrajesh) (2009-01-07 03:20:08) Well, an excellent idea and most expected too. But (http://kde.openoffice.org/) seems struck at March 2006 itself. Any plans(or chance) of revival? -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=304879

1 0

[openFate 100048] MySQL Configuration
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Jan '09

18 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Bernhard Friedreich (Bernhard1234) Feature #100048, revision 25 Title: MySQL Configuration openSUSE-10.3: Rejected by Andreas Jaeger <aj(a)novell.com> reject date: 2007-07-16 19:10:56 reject reason: Too late for 10.3. Priority Requester: Desirable openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Duncan Mac-Vicar <dmacvicar(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-03-18 12:42:12 reject reason: We don't have the resources to finish this module. I will move it to http://en.opensuse.org/Summer_of_Code_2008#YaST_ideas Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Desirable openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-06-26 16:11:49 reject reason: Out of resources. Priority Requester: Desirable openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) + Interested: Bernhard Friedreich (bernhard1234) Interested: Holger Dyroff (escubar) Interested: Michal Hrusecky (-miska-) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: MySQL is used very often on servers. There should be management tool for databases, and database-users and for some mysql-variables (key_buffer, write_buffer and more). Discussion: #1: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2005-11-29 15:46:59) Novell to Offer MySQL Network * http://www.mysql.com/news-and-events/press-release/release_2005_28.html * Novell offers affordable database software and support services through 'MySQL Network' subscriptions #2: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2006-01-03 14:03:13) Holger, can you please qualify this from a PM perspective? (Not for CODE10, of course, but CODE11 or SL10.2/10.3, for example.) #5: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2008-03-18 12:41:18) We don't have the resources to finish this module. I will move it to http://en.opensuse.org/Summer_of_Code_2008#YaST_ideas -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=100048

1 0

[openFate 305634] Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Jan '09

18 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Bernhard Friedreich (Bernhard1234) Feature #305634, revision 25 Title: Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Mandatory Requested by: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) Interested: Andre Duffeck (aduffeck) + Interested: Bernhard Friedreich (bernhard1234) Interested: Bruno Friedmann (bruno_friedmann) Interested: Francis Giannaros (apokryphos) Interested: Guy Lunardi (glunardi) Interested: Joe Brockmeier (jbrockmeier) Interested: JP Rosevear (jproseve) Interested: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) Interested: Mario Carrion (mariocarrion) Interested: Markus K (kamikazow) Interested: Matthias Eckermann (mge1512) Interested: Maxi Schimmel (maxxs) Interested: Robert Davies (robopensuse) Interested: Stefan Behlert (sbehlert) Interested: Stephan Binner (beineri) Interested: Stephan Kulow (coolo) Interested: Thorsten Kukuk (kukuk) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: With the 11.2 cycle, we want to offer users the ability to perform a live system upgrade in the manner of Debian's dist-upgrade. For the purpose of this cycle, we want to support dist-upgrade from the previous version (11.1) only, as this is a sufficiently complicated problem as is. From the user's view, the difference is between being able to update the system incrementally within the given version or service pack running, to being ble to migrate with a system command ("zypper dup" or similar) to a higher version altogether. In the Debian experience, the set of base distributions is not necessarily limited, but it has been Ubuntu's practice to define what starting points other than "release n-1" are allowed (for instance, all LTS versions are purported to be able to "apt dist-upgrade" to the top of the line, although I have heard of problems trying to jump two years - 6.06->8.10 - in a fell swoop in this manner :-). In the openSUSE scope, we should aim to be able to "dup" between incremental versions, starting from 11.1 to 11.2, and later 11.x to 12.0. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: With the introduction of the Zypper stack to SLE, we finally reached the state of a featureful (which YOU was not) and fast, reliable (which ZLM was not) update stack in the platform. For enterprise use, some tweaks are still desirable (changelogs, rollback, ...) which we are looking at, as well as improvements on the Enterprise management front, which we are working on with our SRM colleagues. The only really significant competitive feature we are missing at this point is the Debian/Ubuntu dist-upgrade functionality, which has a powerful psychological impact at the Enterprise level and a much more tangible impact at the small user / single user level: many with no IT department do use Ubuntu these days on the basis that "chasing" Fedora and openSUSE along the six-month upgrade cycle is too much for them, and feel they can save time on Ubuntu with the combination of dist- upgrade and the longer LTS cycle. The rationale for pursuing this is to revoke the special status of coolness this functionality gives Ubuntu, and to terminate the negative influence that may have on our SLE sales (from the expert's personal opinion, the preference then easily spills into purchasing). Discussion: #1: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) (2009-01-07 20:42:15) This is the #1 feature in the systems management scope for 11.2 - I have no doubt it will be fun :-) #4: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2009-01-09 11:32:53) Passing to mls for technical evaluation (solver + autobuild) #5: Michael Schröder (mlschroe) (2009-01-09 12:48:10) Any hint on what features are currently missing? #6: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2009-01-09 13:30:57) (reply to #5) From the top of my head: How to handle * Library ABI changes (e.g. major gcc/g++ upgrades) ? * Core package changes (e.g. devs.rpm to udev) ? * Kernel changes (if application/deamons need a specific kernel abi, dbus comes into mind) ? * Failure handling (network breakdown, package update errors, ...) ? * Booting of the new kernel ? #7: Michael Schröder (mlschroe) (2009-01-09 14:45:09) (reply to #6) And debian does this in some way? #8: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-01-17 12:43:42) (reply to #7) The distupgrade feature differs from changing source list and doing upgrade, so some utility process could be started. They may require some documented procedure to be followed, for "tough" changes. But ABI change, how long since ELF/glibc was introduced? C++ ABI ought not be relevant for upgrade process, they are "just" applications and libaries to be updated. Failure handling - you are told to back up your system first, it is "best effort" not guaranteed. The less you have installed the more likely it is to succeed. Debian offer choice of kernels, this may "punt" the problem to a user controlled install and select from GRUB menu. Debian have apt-cache possibility, to create central pool of packages, to decrease liklihood of network troubles, as well as huge number CD and DVD iso's. #9: Thorsten Kukuk (kukuk) (2009-01-17 15:24:35) (reply to #8) The glibc internal ABI changes frequently. Means, running applications will continue to use the old glibc with the old ABI, but installed are already the new plugins => running applications can crash. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305634

1 0

[openFate 300758] Show orphaned packages
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Jan '09

18 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Bernhard Friedreich (Bernhard1234) Feature #300758, revision 42 Title: Show orphaned packages openSUSE-10.2: Rejected by Thorsten Kukuk <kukuk(a)novell.com> reject date: 2006-08-02 11:31:19 reject reason: For SL10.2 we have to get libzypp really stable and fast before we add new features. Priority Requester: Important openSUSE-10.3: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2007-07-17 17:03:57 reject reason: Postponing. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Desirable openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2007-11-21 12:16:20 reject reason: Out of scope for 11.0 Priority Requester: Important openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-07-07 13:34:02 reject reason: Postponing, needs underlaying infrastructure to be fixed first. Priority Requester: Important openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Stephan Binner (beineri) Interested: Andreas Jaeger (a_jaeger) Interested: Andrey S (seld) + Interested: Bernhard Friedreich (bernhard1234) Interested: Ján Kupec (jkupec) Interested: Matthias Eckermann (mge1512) Interested: Pedro Canovas (pedrogeek) Interested: Rémy Marquis (spyhawk) Interested: Ruchir Brahmbhatt (ruchir) Interested: Santiago Hirschfeld (jsantiagoh) Interested: Stefan Ott (steve_odd) Interested: Vincent Untz (vuntz) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: The package manager should learn to show orphanized packages (packages which are not required by other packages and are not in wanted selections) and allow to deinstall them like the popular debfoster/deborphan tools. A typical use case: user installs an application which pulls in some dependencies to test it, uninstalls the application shortly after or way later but the dependencies stay unused installed on the system. Commandline UI (zypper) only. References: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=166132 Discussion: #1: Jiri Srain (jsrain) (2007-06-05 13:46:00) Schubi, is there any possibility to make solver tell which packages are orphanized? It would be interesting especially if the packages which are marked for deletion were considered as non-installed (eg. if foo- devel is installed but marked for deletion and nothing else requires foo, then foo is orphanized). #2: Stefan Schubert (schubi2) (2007-06-06 11:04:04) (reply to #1) Currently not cause the solver has no information about who (user, package,...) has triggered the installation of a package. If we are storing this information it would be possible for solver to remove these kind of packages too. It is not simple but doable. By the way, we will have to store this kind of information in the future. E.g. we need to save the "keep state by user" in a database in order to regard this state in future solver runs. #3: Jiri Srain (jsrain) (2007-06-06 14:25:07) (reply to #2) Looks like a missunderstanding. Basically every package wihch is not required/recommended/suggested or doesn't enhance anything that is installed and not marked for deletion is IMO considered to be orphanized. If user eg. wants to remove a pattern including all its packages (which are not required by something else), solver providing this kind of information would help a lot (and I don't think that we would need any other information to be stored. #4: Stefan Schubert (schubi2) (2007-06-06 15:33:44) (reply to #3) I do not think so. What does "orphanized" mean ? Let me take your example from comment #1. foo should be deleted too if the user delete foo-devel and foo has been installed due the requirement of foo-devel. BUT the user will kill us if we are deleting foo although the user has installed foo explicit sometime ago in a seperate installation workflow. So this information ( The USER has installed foo) will be currently not saved and is needed here to decide if foo has to be deleted or not. #5: Stefan Schubert (schubi2) (2007-06-06 15:39:47) (reply to #3) Lets take your example concerning the erasing of patterns. That is much more complex. I have already described the problem here: http://en.opensuse.org/Libzypp/Solver#Known_Problems " Proper behaviour of erasing patterns" There are already some bugzilla entries: Bug 274283 - Delete iFolder from YaST makes eDirectory Delete mandatory Bug 238250 - YaST does not upgrade an Add-on Product #6: Jiri Srain (jsrain) (2007-06-08 16:46:32) See also https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=166132 This is another use case for the same solver functionality #8: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) (2008-06-12 20:46:17) this should be commandline-only, definitely an advanced-user option. #9: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) (2008-06-12 20:47:28) cut from description: See Bug 140346 #10: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2008-11-03 11:24:53) As discussed in Prague, this could be done using the package history once we have a reader. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=300758

1 0