January 2009 - openSUSE Features - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[openFate 302306] Reorganization of YaST control center
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 22 Jan '09

22 Jan '09

Feature changed by: evamaria fuchs (nefuchs) Feature #302306, revision 41 Title: Reorganization of YaST control center openSUSE-10.3: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2007-07-03 17:08:02 reject reason: Postponing, we are running out of time. Priority Requester: Mandatory openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-04-25 15:09:31 reject reason: Needs more discussion. Priority Requester: Mandatory Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Federico Lucifredi <flucifredi(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-07-18 18:56:09 reject reason: postponing as per engineering's request. Priority Requester: Mandatory Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Mandatory Requested by: Martin Schmidkunz (mschmidkunz) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: As many users (even the experienced ones) find the current organization of YaST modules confusing a reorganization is needed. We have conducted a usability study where experienced users sorted the YaST modules. So I would really ask to take advantage of these data. You find the data and some thoughts about a possible re-categorization on: http://en.opensuse.org/YaST_Control_Center_-_Card_Sort_Study The reorganization would affect the sorting and presentation, some labeling issues, the use of a consistent icon set, the use of tool tips and an enhancment of search One possible solution would be to organize it similar to the GNOME configuration center: I already heard that it might be mandatory to present AppArmor as an extra section (which in my opinion would be not advisable from a usability perspective, but if it is mandatory, then we have to add it as an extra section). I also thought that some YaST modules (e.g. keyboard, mouse, DNS, Hostname) are doublicated but it turned out, that this makes sense for SLES. Still I suggest combining the modules "user management" and "group management" into a single module called "User and Group Management". This makes sense because opening "user management" and "group management" opens the same module but only show a different view. Documentation Impact: This would require a lot of changes throughout the manuals. Discussion: #1: Tanja Roth (ta-ro) (2007-05-30 14:33:36) Would a reorganization apply to both KDE and GNOME desktop, then? Whatever a new YaST structure would look like, from a doc perspective it would be important that YaST structure and appearance are in sync for both desktops as we strive to use a "common doc base" for both desktops whereever possible to reduce efforts and costs. As reorganization of YaST would require many changes throughout our manuals, we cannot afford to additionally maintain different "flavors" of YaST chapters for KDE/GNOME. Apart from that, consistent structure and appearance of YaST in both desktops would also be a benefit for users. #2: Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) (2007-06-12 11:40:45) Sigi, is the card study finished now? Where can we find the results? #3: Martin Schmidkunz (mschmidkunz) (2007-06-12 13:58:58) > Would a reorganization apply to both KDE and GNOME desktop, then? Yes. Exactly for the reasons you named, Tanja :-) By the way, a reorganization of YaST control center already took place in SLES 10 SP1. This solution is similar to what Sigi and I suggested. Perhaps it would be a good idea to take the YaST control center as it is in SLES 10 SP1, improve it a little and implement its design into all our products. What do you think about that? #4: Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) (2007-06-12 14:00:46) (reply to #3) There was no reorganization for SLE10 SP1. The only change was introduction of slab-based GNOME control center for YaST. The categorization, description and module lists did not change and are shared between KDE and GNOME control centers. #5: Martin Schmidkunz (mschmidkunz) (2007-06-12 18:01:19) I am sorry for a missunderstanding. I meant that we should take the current "GNOME control centre" - like design of the YaST control centre in SLES 10 SP 1 as a base for a redesign of the YaST control centre in our other products. Additionally to that, we should discuss (and perform) a reorganization of modules. #7: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) (2007-06-29 17:59:43) (reply to #5) This is worth pursuing, I am no UX expert, but if we can make it easier for users to find things, we should. A reorganization should be well thought-out, so that we break the existing habits *only once*, we should not be reshuffling things too often. #8: Siegfried Olschner (sdolschn) (2007-07-03 12:35:30) The results of the the cardsort study are available at: http://en.opensuse.org/YaST_Control_Center_-_Card_Sort_Study The subjects (N=~30) have been "Experts", so you can transfer the results to a new openSUSE YaST Control Center. The cluster trees with 2 different statistical options show only one difference: - ISDN, Modem, DSL, Network => Hardware - ISDN, Modem, DSL, Network => Network see http://en.opensuse.org/YaST_Control_Center_-_Card_Sort_Study#Illustrative_M… I'm just writing a sumary. This section is placed at the top of the page. #9: Siegfried Olschner (sdolschn) (2007-07-03 12:39:23) I got only 2-3 NOT-Expert users in the sample. Their results are not presented on the page. But it's clear, they separated out cards like: VLM, iSCSI Initiator, Powertweak, VNC, Sudo, AppArmor, LDAP, etc., etc. #10: Siegfried Olschner (sdolschn) (2007-07-06 10:05:23) Some mockups available at: http://en.opensuse.org/YaST_Control_Center_-_Card_Sort_Study#Sorting_and_pr… #11: Martin Schmidkunz (mschmidkunz) (2007-11-29 13:50:55) Some additional mock ups and thoughs about that topic are available at: http://en.opensuse.org/YaST/Development/New_Control_Center #13: Martin Schmidkunz (mschmidkunz) (2008-02-11 15:24:24) One other suggestion was influenced by the KDE 4 control center: http://en.opensuse.org/YaST/Development/New_Control_Center/YaST_KDEstyle The main concerns with these mock ups are: * information overload * "search" is somehow meaningless if it isn't provided by some kind of thesaurus #15: Berthold Gunreben (azouhr) (2008-04-09 12:52:12) I don't know if this is just too late, but for me the only design that looks like a real step forward from all the designs on http://en.opensuse.org/YaST/Development/New_Control_Center/ is http://en.opensuse.org/YaST/Development/New_Control_Center/YaST_System_Navi… I really like this approach. Please don't just create huge lists of modules, or preselected lists of modules that never can meet the customers needs. #16: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2008-04-24 14:56:14) This feature was on impl. But limited resources and refocus on PackageKit froze development. Passing back to Stano. #17: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) (2008-06-13 19:49:56) lets figure out a plan and get it done this time :) #20: Martin Schmidkunz (mschmidkunz) (2007-09-29 03:17:48) As there is some negative feedback from the KDE 4 personal settings menu (https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=431432), maybe we should take it into account when talking about a YaST control center redesign. BTW: what is the status on this feature request? #21: Thomas Göttlicher (tgoettlicher) (2008-10-23 17:03:56) (reply to #20) Thanks for this hint. Development on this featrue is postponed. + #22: evamaria fuchs (nefuchs) (2009-01-22 17:49:48) + Currently we are conducting usability tests, see: http://en.opensuse.org/YaST/Development/New_Control_Center#Usability_Tests -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=302306

1 0

[openFate 120326] Resume download
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 22 Jan '09

22 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) Feature #120326, revision 43 Title: Resume download openSUSE-10.2: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2006-09-21 09:56:17 reject reason: Not enough resources to implement in time. Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Desirable openSUSE-10.3: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2007-07-25 15:20:32 reject reason: Out of time. Postponing. Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Desirable openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Jiri Srain <jsrain(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-03-28 13:51:03 reject reason: Out of resources for 11.0. Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-07-01 11:34:46 reject reason: Postponing, needs downloading refactor. Priority Requester: Desirable openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: YaST/YOU times out too easy when downloading large packages like kde- base (14 MB) over a single ISDN connection. Please cache the half downloaded package so I don't have to start from the beginning again. See http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=9740 (http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=9740) http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=278507 (http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=9740) Discussion: #1: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2006-06-30 17:40:31) Klaus, do you now whether this is still an issue? #2: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2006-06-30 18:38:23) We still have very large packages (kernel, OpenOffice_org) which might not download completely in one go. #7: Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) (2007-11-23 10:32:46) Related to commit-refactoring. #9: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) (2008-06-12 20:21:33) Klaus, are you still running ISDN? just kidding :-) Stano, please your opinion on workload - is this easily achievable? if not, there are hgher priorities. #10: Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) (2008-06-20 13:10:21) (reply to #9) Jiri, could we get estimate for this? #11: Jiri Srain (jsrain) (2008-08-04 08:59:34) (reply to #10) Since curl itself does support resuming download, then this feature should not be hard to be implemented. #12: Ruchir Brahmbhatt (ruchir) (2009-01-17 12:07:25) I also vote for this feature. #13: Dmitri Mittov (michael_knight) (2009-01-19 09:01:09) It is also a great problem when you use slow mirror. download.opensuse. org redirects me to one of yandex mirrors (score 20). And I have timeout on big packages. #14: Piotrek Juzwiak (benderbendingrodriguez) (2009-01-21 18:17:13) I'd vote at least for a way to change the timeout settings for YaST or it doesn't solve the problem? #15: Alam Aby Bashit (init7) (2009-01-22 09:35:17) I'd like to vote this feature implemented in 11.2. You surely want to have resume capability if you have unreliable yet slow internet connection for say, updating KDE 4.2 :) + #16: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2009-01-22 15:14:44) (reply to #15) + Please stop this "I vote for this" or "+1" or "mee too" comments. There + is no voting system in FATE yet, but following a discussion about "I + want this too" makes hard to evaluate features. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=120326

1 0

[openFate 304879] OOo: Update of KDE integration to KDE4
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 22 Jan '09

22 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Michael Loeffler (sprudel24) Feature #304879, revision 28 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 + openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation + Priority + Requester: Mandatory Requested by: Stephan Binner (beineri) 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? #8: Armin Moradi (amoradi) (2009-01-19 19:30:45) Excellent idea, again, this brings up the consistency issue with the rest of KDE4. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=304879

1 0

[openFate 302963] Rating support for FATE
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 22 Jan '09

22 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Michael Loeffler (sprudel24) Feature #302963, revision 9 Title: Rating support for FATE + openFATE: Evaluation + Priority + Requester: Important Requested by: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) + Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: FATE is becoming a huge database of useless information. Most of this come to the fact that there is only syntantic checking but not social checking. Usecase: Searching and navigating produces lot of: * Duplicate features * Incomplete features (no use cases, examples) * Vague features (a.k.a "#xxxxx YaST should be improved" ) * copy and paste features Features should support rating in the slashdot way (Insightful, Interesting, Informative, Troll, Funny) and rating from 1 to 5. The rating could be used so the same people using FATE could score down low- quality features than only make the process of information flow more difficult. Score threshold could be set by people so only high quality, well specified features are shown. It is important that searching could be done using this ratings. It should be possible to generate rankings over this ratings. Current status FATE does not offer anything to filter low quality features User Experience Query dialog would gain an option for searching. Feature editor would gain a rating dialog where different people would express their rating. Search would be over an average or agregation of this scores. Scores should be saved per rater. Contingency Plan No contingency plan at the software level. At the process level, add comments to every feature lacking business case, detailed description, real benefits, and more important, scope. Documentation Impact: Only needs to be mentioned in the handbook. Test Case: * rate a feature in one or two dimensions (score and category) * search for features >= or <= certain rating Business case (Partner benefit): - Threshold for feature processing should save thousands of dollars in - wasted time doing ping pong, needinfos for features with incomplete - information. Even engineering could be optimized when features with no - real business case dissapear by social tagging. + openSUSE.org: Threshold for feature processing should save thousands of + dollars in wasted time doing ping pong, needinfos for features with + incomplete information. Even engineering could be optimized when + features with no real business case dissapear by social tagging. Discussion: #1: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2008-04-02 01:26:51) Sounds like an interesting idea for openSUSE. I am looking forward towards considering this for some Phase 2 or so once openFATE (or whatever the name is going to be) is up and running. #3: Stephan Binner (beineri) (2009-01-17 16:03:07) (reply to #1) openFATE is now up and running. Can this request be made public to openSUSE.org partner? #2: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2008-11-14 18:05:55) Michl, for the openFATE work. (For SLE, I expect the PMs to take on much of this.) -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=302963

1 0

[openFate 305673] openFATE - link account names to users.o.o
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 22 Jan '09

22 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Michael Loeffler (sprudel24) Feature #305673, revision 4 Title: openFATE - link account names to users.o.o - openFATE: New + openFATE: Evaluation Priority Requester: Mandatory Requested by: Klaas Freitag (kfreitag) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: User account names in openFATE should be a link to the according user.o. o page. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Better integration of the openSUSE tools -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305673

1 0

[openFate 120326] Resume download
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 22 Jan '09

22 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Alam Aby Bashit (init7) Feature #120326, revision 42 Title: Resume download openSUSE-10.2: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2006-09-21 09:56:17 reject reason: Not enough resources to implement in time. Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Desirable openSUSE-10.3: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2007-07-25 15:20:32 reject reason: Out of time. Postponing. Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Desirable openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Jiri Srain <jsrain(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-03-28 13:51:03 reject reason: Out of resources for 11.0. Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-07-01 11:34:46 reject reason: Postponing, needs downloading refactor. Priority Requester: Desirable openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: YaST/YOU times out too easy when downloading large packages like kde- base (14 MB) over a single ISDN connection. Please cache the half downloaded package so I don't have to start from the beginning again. See http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=9740 (http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=9740) http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=278507 (http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=9740) Discussion: #1: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2006-06-30 17:40:31) Klaus, do you now whether this is still an issue? #2: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2006-06-30 18:38:23) We still have very large packages (kernel, OpenOffice_org) which might not download completely in one go. #7: Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) (2007-11-23 10:32:46) Related to commit-refactoring. #9: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) (2008-06-12 20:21:33) Klaus, are you still running ISDN? just kidding :-) Stano, please your opinion on workload - is this easily achievable? if not, there are hgher priorities. #10: Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) (2008-06-20 13:10:21) (reply to #9) Jiri, could we get estimate for this? #11: Jiri Srain (jsrain) (2008-08-04 08:59:34) (reply to #10) Since curl itself does support resuming download, then this feature should not be hard to be implemented. #12: Ruchir Brahmbhatt (ruchir) (2009-01-17 12:07:25) I also vote for this feature. #13: Dmitri Mittov (michael_knight) (2009-01-19 09:01:09) It is also a great problem when you use slow mirror. download.opensuse. org redirects me to one of yandex mirrors (score 20). And I have timeout on big packages. #14: Piotrek Juzwiak (benderbendingrodriguez) (2009-01-21 18:17:13) I'd vote at least for a way to change the timeout settings for YaST or it doesn't solve the problem? + #15: Alam Aby Bashit (init7) (2009-01-22 09:35:17) + I'd like to vote this feature implemented in 11.2. You surely want to + have resume capability if you have unreliable yet slow internet + connection for say, updating KDE 4.2 :) -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=120326

1 0

[openFate 120326] Resume download
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 21 Jan '09

21 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Piotrek Juzwiak (BenderBendingRodriguez) Feature #120326, revision 41 Title: Resume download openSUSE-10.2: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2006-09-21 09:56:17 reject reason: Not enough resources to implement in time. Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Desirable openSUSE-10.3: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2007-07-25 15:20:32 reject reason: Out of time. Postponing. Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Desirable openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Jiri Srain <jsrain(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-03-28 13:51:03 reject reason: Out of resources for 11.0. Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-07-01 11:34:46 reject reason: Postponing, needs downloading refactor. Priority Requester: Desirable openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: YaST/YOU times out too easy when downloading large packages like kde- base (14 MB) over a single ISDN connection. Please cache the half downloaded package so I don't have to start from the beginning again. See http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=9740 (http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=9740) http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=278507 (http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=9740) Discussion: #1: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2006-06-30 17:40:31) Klaus, do you now whether this is still an issue? #2: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2006-06-30 18:38:23) We still have very large packages (kernel, OpenOffice_org) which might not download completely in one go. #7: Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) (2007-11-23 10:32:46) Related to commit-refactoring. #9: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) (2008-06-12 20:21:33) Klaus, are you still running ISDN? just kidding :-) Stano, please your opinion on workload - is this easily achievable? if not, there are hgher priorities. #10: Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) (2008-06-20 13:10:21) (reply to #9) Jiri, could we get estimate for this? #11: Jiri Srain (jsrain) (2008-08-04 08:59:34) (reply to #10) Since curl itself does support resuming download, then this feature should not be hard to be implemented. #12: Ruchir Brahmbhatt (ruchir) (2009-01-17 12:07:25) I also vote for this feature. #13: Dmitri Mittov (michael_knight) (2009-01-19 09:01:09) It is also a great problem when you use slow mirror. download.opensuse. org redirects me to one of yandex mirrors (score 20). And I have timeout on big packages. + #14: Piotrek Juzwiak (benderbendingrodriguez) (2009-01-21 18:17:13) + I'd vote at least for a way to change the timeout settings for YaST or + it doesn't solve the problem? -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=120326

1 0

[openFate 303809] Partitioner: allow cloning of disk layouts - was: easier creation of RAID 1
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 21 Jan '09

21 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Matthias Eckermann (mge1512) Feature #303809, revision 17 Title: Partitioner: allow cloning of disk layouts - was: easier creation of RAID 1 openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Matthias Eckermann <mge(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-07-30 16:50:50 reject reason: Moving to SLE 11 SP 1 / openSUSE 11.2 Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Matthias Eckermann (mge1512) + Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Proposal is to offer an option in YaST to clone a disk layout for RAID use and probably jump into the RAID-creation-mode directly Below the original request from C. Boltz / openSUSE community: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It would be good to have an easier way to setup a raid 1 (mirroring). Currently you have to: * create partitions on first disk * create partitions on the second disk (usually using the same layout). * put the corresponding partitions (sda1+sdb1, sda2+sdb2, ...) into a raid array. The easier way would be * [x] I want to create a raid 1 * define the partitioning once for both disks YaST should then partition both disks as requested and create the raid volumes This would save the user/admin some time. However, the traditional method should still be available in case someone wants to have a different layout for some partitions for whatever reason. Relations: - Partitioner: allow cloning of disk layouts - was: easier creation of RAID 1 (novell/bugzilla/id: 387373) https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=387373 Discussion: #2: Matthias Eckermann (mge1512) (2008-05-06 20:10:22) Thanks for the proposal. I am happy that there are more people out there sharing my problems:-) Yet, looking at the current "model" we have in mind for partitioner enhancements, I wonder, if we could probably make that more "generic" by adding something like a "clone disk partitioning scheme" button: You would partition hd0 first and then say: please clone this to hd1, hd2, ... and be able to adjust settings on hd1, ... later. Would that fit? so long - MgE #3: Christian Boltz (cboltz) (2008-05-08 05:07:14) Cloning the disk layout sounds like a good idea and would help. To make it more useful for RAID creation, add "clone to md*", maybe combined with a selection dialog to choose the disks to use. #4: Matthias Eckermann (mge1512) (2008-05-08 05:26:16) Well, you know, we indeed are planning to have such a dialog for creation of raids in the future, ...:-) I changed the "title" according to our discussion, and will 1transfer the request into our internal Feature tracking system soon. Thanks! so long - MgE #6: Martin Schmidkunz (mschmidkunz) (2008-05-15 11:37:58) AFAIK it is currently possible to create one partition after the other. So it does not make sense for me to have a "Clone this partition for future use" at the end. Instead I thought of: http://en.opensuse.org/Image:Idea_303809_1.png When the user presses "Add" in the "partitioning" tab he can choose whether to create one new partition or to use the whole partition scheme from another physical harddisk. Does that make sense? #7: Matthias Eckermann (mge1512) (2008-05-15 12:05:53) (reply to #6) Well, no:-( We are not asking for _partition_ cloning, but _disk_ cloning, i.e. if you have several harddisks, and you want to copy the partitioning from sda to sdb or the like. #8: Martin Schmidkunz (mschmidkunz) (2008-05-16 10:01:41) As discussed live with mge we agree on my proposal. #9: Arvin Schnell (aschnell) (2008-05-16 10:33:01) (reply to #8) That approach has some problems: 1) Hiding "Cloning" behind "Add Partition" is incomprehensible. Cloning affect the whole disk, adding a partition not really. 2) The step to select the partition type is omitted if only one type of partition can be selected. 3) The complete workflow of adding a partition is omitted when no partitions can be created. We (mge, mschmidkunz and aschnell) now agreed upon adding an entry to the "expert" menubutton in the partition overview. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=303809

1 0

[openFate 305715] Package event framework
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 21 Jan '09

21 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Andreas Jaeger (a_jaeger) Feature #305715, revision 4 Title: Package event framework openSUSE-11.2: New Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Andreas Gruenbacher (agruen) + Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: The installation, upgrade, or removal of several packages triggers actions such as running ldconfig, rebuilding the initrd, or similar. Those actions are not specific to the package at hand, but either global with a system-wide effect (such as running ldconfig), or they affect a group of packages (such as all kernel (sub-)packages of a specific version, including all KMPs affectiong it). Those actions need to be run eventually (with order restrictions relative to other package installs, upgrades, or removals), but running them again and again for each package is wasteful. In former days, SuSEconfig was used for some of those tasks, but it turned into a major nightmare (perhaps due to its design). It would be nice if we could come up with a framework in which packages can trigger events and define which actions they need to be run, and rpm will then perform those actions in an appropriate order, avoiding repeating the same action unnecessarily. (The dependencies between actions and package installs/upgrades/removals are somewhat complex, but I think they are manageable.) -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305715

1 0

[openFate 305622] Add support for lzop compression to GNU tar
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 20 Jan '09

20 Jan '09

Feature changed by: roland kletzing (rkletzin) Feature #305622, revision 9 Title: Add support for lzop compression to GNU tar openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Mandatory Requested by: Matthias Eckermann (mge1512) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: (iaW) update to tar 1.21 Discussion: #1: Jan Engelhardt (jengelh) (2009-01-19 09:32:51) tar --use=lzop -cf foo.tar.lzop + #2: roland kletzing (rkletzin) (2009-01-20 21:44:53) + shouldn`t we first have lzop package being part of the distro/factory, + before make standard tools using it? (also see + https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461228) it`s on the + wishlist for a long time now, glad to see that we have openFate now + (since adding to the wishlist was as good as talking to a wall) -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305622

1 0

[openFate 305489] default email in email applications
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 20 Jan '09

20 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Martin Lasarsch (mlasars) Feature #305489, revision 11 Title: default email in email applications openSUSE-11.2: New Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Martin Lasarsch (mlasars) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: To get more subscriptions to the mailinglists it would be nice to have a "default mail" in the mail clients (evolution, kmail) which points the user to the mailinglists. Every openSUSE user should be subscribed to opensuse-announce at least. A simple reply to this "default mail" should subscribe to the list. Of course there could be more information in it, like other important lists, pointing to the main list page. evolution have already a "default mail", with general information about evolution, kmail afaik not. This might be also usefull for OEM customers to have a welcome mail for the customers, pointing to the support pages etc.. So general email "branding" packages which makes it possible to have such special "default mails" for the email clients would be usefull. Discussion: #1: Carlos Lange (cflange) (2009-01-17 19:59:30) There are several parts to this suggestion. 1) "default mail": If you mean "Default" in the sense that when I start a new message the To: field is filled out by default with the mailing- list address, I disagree with your comment. The user should set that and an inexperienced user should find herself/himself subscribing to a mailing-list by mistake, just because they forgot to reset the To: field. Such a user would be rightly upset and feel like they were trapped into doing it. 2) If you mean, however, that the address book in Evolution and Kmail should be pre-populated with relevant addresses, such as the mailing- list and others, in the same way the Firefox bookmarks toolbar comes pre-populated with the SUSE folder, then I would agree that this is a useful suggestion, because the user can freely choose to use those addresses or not. 3) I strongly disagree that every openSUSE user should be subscribed to the opensuse-announce mailing-list. I deal with many different types of users. Only a minority of them would be interested in receiving announcements and they actively subscribe to the mailing-list. The vast majority of them likes the Linux-way of being non-intrusive, without the nags and unsolicited messages from the proprietary world, that tend to be associated with annoying marketing strategies. Please, don't advocate that for openSUSE. The SUSE information box shown at the first login is as much in-your- face direct marketing as one should need to take when using openSUSE. And being beautiful and carefully designed as it is, it contains all information a new user needs to decide how much involved with the operating system they want to be. #2: Joe Brockmeier (jbrockmeier) (2009-01-20 02:05:37) (reply to #1) Perhaps "every" is a bit much, but I feel a lot more people should be subscribed than are currently. I find it's not uncommon to talk to people and see that they're unaware of something happening in the community that has been announced on the mailing list. The percentage of people subscribed to -announce is much less than 1% of openSUSE users, and I feel we could be reaching a lot more people. It's not an "annoying marketing strategy," it's an attempt to keep our community informed. Most of the messages that go to announce are not "marketing" in nature, they're informative. #3: Kevin Dupuy (kdupuy9) (2009-01-20 02:49:32) (reply to #2) I also like the idea of having more users subscribed to the -announce list. Every time there is scheduled downtime, even though it is announced on -announce and openSUSE News, some people come on the opensuse(a)o.o mailinglist "eh, what happened? the servers are down, suse is unreliable!",. so those type of mails I'd like for more users to get. Then again perhaps not every user wants to know when the next project meeting is, so that's a strike against the idea as well. I do think, as with Carlos, that the address book in Kontact and Evolution should have some important email address in there (opensuse(a)o.o, anything else?) + #4: Martin Lasarsch (mlasars) (2009-01-20 17:12:09) (reply to #1) + 1. no + 2. maybe, why not + 3. should means as an opt-in ... not forcing + With default i meant to have a simple email in the inbox to make it + easier to subscribe to the announce list. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305489

1 0

[openFate 305574] Integrate ftrace
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Greg Kroah-Hartman (gregkh) Feature #305574, revision 3 Title: Integrate ftrace openSUSE-11.2: New Priority Requester: Mandatory Requested by: Jan Blunck (janblunck) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: The ftrace infrastructure currently available in upstream kernels comes with different tracers. Having these tracers general available would enable us to find performance and functional regressions more easily during development and in support. Some of them need further work to be included in production kernels (so they don't depend on frame pointers etc.). + Discussion: + #1: Greg Kroah-Hartman (gregkh) (2009-01-20 05:11:51) + We will get these automatically with the 11.2 release, so I don't see + this as a big issue at all. Is there something different that we need + to do to support these tracers? -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305574

1 0

[openFate 305634] Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Cristian Rodríguez (elvigia) Feature #305634, revision 34 Title: Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Mandatory Requested by: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) 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. + #10: Cristian Rodríguez (elvigia) (2009-01-20 03:36:38) (reply to #8) + ABI is important during the upgrade process, I have seen applications + crashing if you upgrade running a desktop enviroment, however we need + to worry more about other stuff first IMHO. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305634

1 0

[openFate 305489] default email in email applications
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Kevin Dupuy (kdupuy9) Feature #305489, revision 10 Title: default email in email applications openSUSE-11.2: New Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Martin Lasarsch (mlasars) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: To get more subscriptions to the mailinglists it would be nice to have a "default mail" in the mail clients (evolution, kmail) which points the user to the mailinglists. Every openSUSE user should be subscribed to opensuse-announce at least. A simple reply to this "default mail" should subscribe to the list. Of course there could be more information in it, like other important lists, pointing to the main list page. evolution have already a "default mail", with general information about evolution, kmail afaik not. This might be also usefull for OEM customers to have a welcome mail for the customers, pointing to the support pages etc.. So general email "branding" packages which makes it possible to have such special "default mails" for the email clients would be usefull. Discussion: #1: Carlos Lange (cflange) (2009-01-17 19:59:30) There are several parts to this suggestion. 1) "default mail": If you mean "Default" in the sense that when I start a new message the To: field is filled out by default with the mailing- list address, I disagree with your comment. The user should set that and an inexperienced user should find herself/himself subscribing to a mailing-list by mistake, just because they forgot to reset the To: field. Such a user would be rightly upset and feel like they were trapped into doing it. 2) If you mean, however, that the address book in Evolution and Kmail should be pre-populated with relevant addresses, such as the mailing- list and others, in the same way the Firefox bookmarks toolbar comes pre-populated with the SUSE folder, then I would agree that this is a useful suggestion, because the user can freely choose to use those addresses or not. 3) I strongly disagree that every openSUSE user should be subscribed to the opensuse-announce mailing-list. I deal with many different types of users. Only a minority of them would be interested in receiving announcements and they actively subscribe to the mailing-list. The vast majority of them likes the Linux-way of being non-intrusive, without the nags and unsolicited messages from the proprietary world, that tend to be associated with annoying marketing strategies. Please, don't advocate that for openSUSE. The SUSE information box shown at the first login is as much in-your- face direct marketing as one should need to take when using openSUSE. And being beautiful and carefully designed as it is, it contains all information a new user needs to decide how much involved with the operating system they want to be. #2: Joe Brockmeier (jbrockmeier) (2009-01-20 02:05:37) (reply to #1) Perhaps "every" is a bit much, but I feel a lot more people should be subscribed than are currently. I find it's not uncommon to talk to people and see that they're unaware of something happening in the community that has been announced on the mailing list. The percentage of people subscribed to -announce is much less than 1% of openSUSE users, and I feel we could be reaching a lot more people. It's not an "annoying marketing strategy," it's an attempt to keep our community informed. Most of the messages that go to announce are not "marketing" in nature, they're informative. + #3: Kevin Dupuy (kdupuy9) (2009-01-20 02:49:32) (reply to #2) + I also like the idea of having more users subscribed to the -announce + list. Every time there is scheduled downtime, even though it is + announced on -announce and openSUSE News, some people come on the + opensuse(a)o.o mailinglist "eh, what happened? the servers are down, suse + is unreliable!",. so those type of mails I'd like for more users to + get. Then again perhaps not every user wants to know when the next + project meeting is, so that's a strike against the idea as well. + I do think, as with Carlos, that the address book in Kontact and + Evolution should have some important email address in there + (opensuse(a)o.o, anything else?) -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305489

1 0

[openFate 305489] default email in email applications
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Joe Brockmeier (jbrockmeier) Feature #305489, revision 9 Title: default email in email applications openSUSE-11.2: New Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Martin Lasarsch (mlasars) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: To get more subscriptions to the mailinglists it would be nice to have a "default mail" in the mail clients (evolution, kmail) which points the user to the mailinglists. Every openSUSE user should be subscribed to opensuse-announce at least. A simple reply to this "default mail" should subscribe to the list. Of course there could be more information in it, like other important lists, pointing to the main list page. evolution have already a "default mail", with general information about evolution, kmail afaik not. This might be also usefull for OEM customers to have a welcome mail for the customers, pointing to the support pages etc.. So general email "branding" packages which makes it possible to have such special "default mails" for the email clients would be usefull. Discussion: #1: Carlos Lange (cflange) (2009-01-17 19:59:30) There are several parts to this suggestion. 1) "default mail": If you mean "Default" in the sense that when I start a new message the To: field is filled out by default with the mailing- list address, I disagree with your comment. The user should set that and an inexperienced user should find herself/himself subscribing to a mailing-list by mistake, just because they forgot to reset the To: field. Such a user would be rightly upset and feel like they were trapped into doing it. 2) If you mean, however, that the address book in Evolution and Kmail should be pre-populated with relevant addresses, such as the mailing- list and others, in the same way the Firefox bookmarks toolbar comes pre-populated with the SUSE folder, then I would agree that this is a useful suggestion, because the user can freely choose to use those addresses or not. 3) I strongly disagree that every openSUSE user should be subscribed to the opensuse-announce mailing-list. I deal with many different types of users. Only a minority of them would be interested in receiving announcements and they actively subscribe to the mailing-list. The vast majority of them likes the Linux-way of being non-intrusive, without the nags and unsolicited messages from the proprietary world, that tend to be associated with annoying marketing strategies. Please, don't advocate that for openSUSE. The SUSE information box shown at the first login is as much in-your- face direct marketing as one should need to take when using openSUSE. And being beautiful and carefully designed as it is, it contains all information a new user needs to decide how much involved with the operating system they want to be. + #2: Joe Brockmeier (jbrockmeier) (2009-01-20 02:05:37) (reply to #1) + Perhaps "every" is a bit much, but I feel a lot more people should be + subscribed than are currently. I find it's not uncommon to talk to + people and see that they're unaware of something happening in the + community that has been announced on the mailing list. The percentage + of people subscribed to -announce is much less than 1% of openSUSE + users, and I feel we could be reaching a lot more people. + It's not an "annoying marketing strategy," it's an attempt to keep our + community informed. Most of the messages that go to announce are not + "marketing" in nature, they're informative. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305489

1 0

[openFate 304879] OOo: Update of KDE integration to KDE4
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Armin Moradi (amoradi) Feature #304879, revision 26 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) 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? + #8: Armin Moradi (amoradi) (2009-01-19 19:30:45) + Excellent idea, again, this brings up the consistency issue with the + rest of KDE4. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=304879

1 0

[openFate 300758] Show orphaned packages
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Pavol Rusnak (prusnak) Feature #300758, revision 45 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) 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. #11: Karsten König (remur) (2009-01-19 10:09:49) How about using rpmorphan, I agree with flucifredi about the command line idea... http://rpmorphan.sourceforge.net/ And otherwise you could use their system to find orphanized packages and display them in yast but make clear that deleting -all orphanized packages will also delete the ones explicitly installed... (it only detects wether the package fullfiles any requirement...) #12: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-01-19 14:48:38) (reply to #11) I'm not the solver developer, but i'm pretty sure it's easy (and probably more effective) to find the 'leaf' packages (that's what rpmorphan seems to do) using existing solver (see satsolver package). But we don't want to just highlight leaf packages, we want to remove unused packages, that is all leaves minus those explicitly installed. So we will feed the solver with this 'explicitly-installed' information. The package history will be the source of this info for now. Maybe later we find some way to store this info that could be used across tools (e.g. directly in the rpm db). So rpmorphan will be able to use this info as well. + #13: Pavol Rusnak (prusnak) (2009-01-19 15:44:26) (reply to #12) + Yes, that's good idea. Detecting leaf packages is the first step. + Detecting which ones to remove (i.e. not explicitly installed) is the + second. + I think that rpmorphan shows all leaf packages, but it selects only the + ones that start with "lib". If we strictly followed library packaging + policy that would do the trick. + btw. rpmorphan is packaged in Contrib + (http://en.opensuse.org/Contrib) -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=300758

1 0

[openFate 300758] Show orphaned packages
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Ján Kupec (jkupec) Feature #300758, revision 44 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: Michael Schröder (mlschroe) 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. #11: Karsten König (remur) (2009-01-19 10:09:49) How about using rpmorphan, I agree with flucifredi about the command line idea... http://rpmorphan.sourceforge.net/ And otherwise you could use their system to find orphanized packages and display them in yast but make clear that deleting -all orphanized packages will also delete the ones explicitly installed... (it only detects wether the package fullfiles any requirement...) + #12: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-01-19 14:48:38) (reply to #11) + I'm not the solver developer, but i'm pretty sure it's easy (and + probably more effective) to find the 'leaf' packages (that's what + rpmorphan seems to do) using existing solver (see satsolver package). + But we don't want to just highlight leaf packages, we want to remove + unused packages, that is all leaves minus those explicitly installed. + So we will feed the solver with this 'explicitly-installed' + information. The package history will be the source of this info for + now. Maybe later we find some way to store this info that could be used + across tools (e.g. directly in the rpm db). So rpmorphan will be able + to use this info as well. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=300758

1 0

[openFate 305634] Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Sebastian Siebert (Freespacer) Feature #305634, revision 32 Title: Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Mandatory Requested by: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) Interested: Alexey Gaponik (hedgehog77) Interested: Andre Duffeck (aduffeck) Interested: Andrey Karepin (egdfree) Interested: Bernhard Friedreich (bernhard1234) Interested: Bruno Friedmann (bruno_friedmann) Interested: Francis Giannaros (apokryphos) Interested: Guy Lunardi (glunardi) Interested: Jakub Rusinek (liviopl) 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: Sebastian Siebert (freespacer) Interested: Stefan Behlert (sbehlert) Interested: Stephan Binner (beineri) Interested: Stephan Kulow (coolo) Interested: Thorsten Kukuk (kukuk) Interested: Victor Prosolin (prosolin) 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 303532] Reduce size of updates for openSUSE Factory
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Jakub Rusinek (liviopl) Feature #303532, revision 21 Title: Reduce size of updates for openSUSE Factory Buildservice: Evaluation Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Stephan Kulow <coolo(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-06-06 09:06:29 reject reason: not really attached to a specific openSUSE version Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Adrian Schröter <adrian(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-11-06 16:10:03 reject reason: This is a build service feature, but no distribution feature. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important Requested by: Michael Loeffler (sprudel24) Interested: Andrey Karepin (egdfree) Interested: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) Interested: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) + Interested: Jakub Rusinek (liviopl) Interested: Klaas Freitag (kfreitag) Interested: Lukas Lipavsky (llipavsky) Interested: Maxi Schimmel (maxxs) Interested: Michal Marek (michal-m) Interested: Peter Poeml (poeml) Interested: Ruchir Brahmbhatt (ruchir) Interested: Ruediger Oertel (oertel) Interested: Stephan Kulow (coolo) Interested: Vincent Untz (vuntz) Interested: Vitaliy Tomin (highwaystar) Interested: Vitaliy Tomin (highwaystar) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Each update currently is around 2GB which is already much for broadband bandwith. For user with less bandwith it's by and large impossible to use Factory. Goal is to reduce size of updates and stay with frequent updates to offer latest software to the user. As we want more people using Factory it's usage needs to be conveniant. Discussion: #1: Stephan Kulow (coolo) (2008-03-27 16:48:43) According to discussions with Rudi and mls, the delta setup on dist need to be changed to also contain the rpm header and the deltas need to be indexed in a way that zypp will see them. So we can still use drpmsync for internal distribution and put the deltas only in instsource for mirrors. #2: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2008-04-22 13:28:56) This will happen automatically once the remaining parts of libzypp deltarpm handling are finished. We only need to agree on the format. I will propose something today. #3: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2008-05-26 17:09:31) ZYpp side is done. The only thing that needs to be done is to generate the deltarpm metadata in factory. I will post link to documentation and examples shortly. #4: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2009-01-03 14:54:00) Opening this up for openSUSE.org. #5: Stephan Kulow (coolo) (2009-01-16 08:24:42) ok, we discussed this a bit further. We plan to throw away builds that are equal to the previous build and publish deltas generated by the build clients if they are not equal. If a build is equal is to be defined, for now it's a shell script that checks various properties - and works acceptable for now. I rebuild a good portion of 11.1 without further changes and get 7345 binary rpms (including all subpackages). 5666 are considered equal by my current script (based on work by Michael Matz). And many of other packages are possible to fix, so they are equal too. So this gives for uneffected rebuilds a huge reduction of updates. The kernels and kmps are currently seen as !equal after an uneffected rebuild as they put the %release (rebuild counter) in many places. Not sure how much the script should work around such cases. But even for those the download size would reduce: kernel-default.i586 (with base and extra): 25.7MB to download deltas of it: 6.7MB (I think the kernel puts a lot of "rebuild on" info in the code) -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=303532

1 0

[openFate 305634] Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Jakub Rusinek (liviopl) Feature #305634, revision 31 Title: Debian-like dist-upgrade live system full version upgrade openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Mandatory Requested by: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) Interested: Alexey Gaponik (hedgehog77) Interested: Andre Duffeck (aduffeck) Interested: Andrey Karepin (egdfree) Interested: Bernhard Friedreich (bernhard1234) Interested: Bruno Friedmann (bruno_friedmann) Interested: Francis Giannaros (apokryphos) Interested: Guy Lunardi (glunardi) + Interested: Jakub Rusinek (liviopl) 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) Interested: Victor Prosolin (prosolin) 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 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Sebastian Siebert (Freespacer) Feature #304879, revision 24 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: Andrey Karepin (egdfree) Interested: Bernhard Friedreich (bernhard1234) Interested: Johann-Nikolaus Andreae (jnandreae) Interested: Karsten König (remur) Interested: Markus K (kamikazow) Interested: Maxi Schimmel (maxxs) Interested: Ruchir Brahmbhatt (ruchir) + Interested: Sebastian Siebert (freespacer) 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 120326] Resume download
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Dmitri Mittov (Michael_Knight) Feature #120326, revision 37 Title: Resume download openSUSE-10.2: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2006-09-21 09:56:17 reject reason: Not enough resources to implement in time. Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Desirable openSUSE-10.3: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2007-07-25 15:20:32 reject reason: Out of time. Postponing. Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Desirable openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Jiri Srain <jsrain(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-03-28 13:51:03 reject reason: Out of resources for 11.0. Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-07-01 11:34:46 reject reason: Postponing, needs downloading refactor. Priority Requester: Desirable openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) Interested: Andreas Jaeger (a_jaeger) Interested: Bernhard Friedreich (bernhard1234) Interested: Ján Kupec (jkupec) Interested: Ruchir Brahmbhatt (ruchir) Interested: Sebastian Siebert (freespacer) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: YaST/YOU times out too easy when downloading large packages like kde- base (14 MB) over a single ISDN connection. Please cache the half downloaded package so I don't have to start from the beginning again. See http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=9740 (http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=9740) http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=278507 (http://bugzilla.suse.de/show_bug.cgi?id=9740) Discussion: #1: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2006-06-30 17:40:31) Klaus, do you now whether this is still an issue? #2: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2006-06-30 18:38:23) We still have very large packages (kernel, OpenOffice_org) which might not download completely in one go. #7: Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) (2007-11-23 10:32:46) Related to commit-refactoring. #9: Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi) (2008-06-12 20:21:33) Klaus, are you still running ISDN? just kidding :-) Stano, please your opinion on workload - is this easily achievable? if not, there are hgher priorities. #10: Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) (2008-06-20 13:10:21) (reply to #9) Jiri, could we get estimate for this? #11: Jiri Srain (jsrain) (2008-08-04 08:59:34) (reply to #10) Since curl itself does support resuming download, then this feature should not be hard to be implemented. #12: Ruchir Brahmbhatt (ruchir) (2009-01-17 12:07:25) I also vote for this feature. + #13: Dmitri Mittov (michael_knight) (2009-01-19 09:01:09) + It is also a great problem when you use slow mirror. download.opensuse. + org redirects me to one of yandex mirrors (score 20). And I have + timeout on big packages. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=120326

1 0

[openFate 304879] OOo: Update of KDE integration to KDE4
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Andrey Karepin (EGDFree) Feature #304879, revision 23 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: Andrey Karepin (egdfree) Interested: Bernhard Friedreich (bernhard1234) Interested: Johann-Nikolaus Andreae (jnandreae) Interested: Karsten König (remur) 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 303532] Reduce size of updates for openSUSE Factory
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 19 Jan '09

19 Jan '09

Feature changed by: Andrey Karepin (EGDFree) Feature #303532, revision 20 Title: Reduce size of updates for openSUSE Factory Buildservice: Evaluation Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Stephan Kulow <coolo(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-06-06 09:06:29 reject reason: not really attached to a specific openSUSE version Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Adrian Schröter <adrian(a)novell.com> reject date: 2008-11-06 16:10:03 reject reason: This is a build service feature, but no distribution feature. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important Requested by: Michael Loeffler (sprudel24) + Interested: Andrey Karepin (egdfree) Interested: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) Interested: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) Interested: Klaas Freitag (kfreitag) Interested: Lukas Lipavsky (llipavsky) Interested: Maxi Schimmel (maxxs) Interested: Michal Marek (michal-m) Interested: Peter Poeml (poeml) Interested: Ruchir Brahmbhatt (ruchir) Interested: Ruediger Oertel (oertel) Interested: Stephan Kulow (coolo) Interested: Vincent Untz (vuntz) Interested: Vitaliy Tomin (highwaystar) Interested: Vitaliy Tomin (highwaystar) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Each update currently is around 2GB which is already much for broadband bandwith. For user with less bandwith it's by and large impossible to use Factory. Goal is to reduce size of updates and stay with frequent updates to offer latest software to the user. As we want more people using Factory it's usage needs to be conveniant. Discussion: #1: Stephan Kulow (coolo) (2008-03-27 16:48:43) According to discussions with Rudi and mls, the delta setup on dist need to be changed to also contain the rpm header and the deltas need to be indexed in a way that zypp will see them. So we can still use drpmsync for internal distribution and put the deltas only in instsource for mirrors. #2: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2008-04-22 13:28:56) This will happen automatically once the remaining parts of libzypp deltarpm handling are finished. We only need to agree on the format. I will propose something today. #3: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2008-05-26 17:09:31) ZYpp side is done. The only thing that needs to be done is to generate the deltarpm metadata in factory. I will post link to documentation and examples shortly. #4: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2009-01-03 14:54:00) Opening this up for openSUSE.org. #5: Stephan Kulow (coolo) (2009-01-16 08:24:42) ok, we discussed this a bit further. We plan to throw away builds that are equal to the previous build and publish deltas generated by the build clients if they are not equal. If a build is equal is to be defined, for now it's a shell script that checks various properties - and works acceptable for now. I rebuild a good portion of 11.1 without further changes and get 7345 binary rpms (including all subpackages). 5666 are considered equal by my current script (based on work by Michael Matz). And many of other packages are possible to fix, so they are equal too. So this gives for uneffected rebuilds a huge reduction of updates. The kernels and kmps are currently seen as !equal after an uneffected rebuild as they put the %release (rebuild counter) in many places. Not sure how much the script should work around such cases. But even for those the download size would reduce: kernel-default.i586 (with base and extra): 25.7MB to download deltas of it: 6.7MB (I think the kernel puts a lot of "rebuild on" info in the code) -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=303532

1 0