December 2009 - openSUSE Features - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[openFATE 303809] Partitioner: allow cloning of disk layouts - was: easier creation of RAID 1
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 22 Dec '09

22 Dec '09

Feature changed by: Arvin Schnell (aschnell) Feature #303809, revision 30 Title: Partitioner: allow cloning of disk layouts - was: easier creation of RAID 1 openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Matthias Eckermann (mge1512) 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: Rejected by Christoph Thiel (cthiel1) reject date: 2009-06-03 08:23:34 reject reason: no resources for 11.2. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important - openSUSE-11.3: Evaluation + openSUSE-11.3: Done Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important Requested by: Matthias Eckermann (mge1512) 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. #16: Arvin Schnell (aschnell) (2009-02-04 11:08:08) Summarising the request: Add a entry "Close disk layout" to the "Expert" button in the disk view. This opens a dialog showing all disks that are suitable for being a clone (constraints: new disks must have equal or larger size). Several disks can be selected. On the selected disks: Delete everything (including RAIDs and LVMs somehow using that disk), create new partition table (if different from existing) and create partitions with same start and sizes (in cylinders as libstorage calculates internally) and partition IDs. Other parameters, e.g. filesystem, are not copied. #18: Katarina Machalkova (kmachalkova) (2009-11-05 14:37:47) ... and done :) + #19: Arvin Schnell (aschnell) (2009-12-22 15:30:56) + Ported to openSUSE 11.3. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/303809

1 0

[New: openFATE 308589] Add button i Yast's printer GUI to open up the CUPS Web interface
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 20 Dec '09

20 Dec '09

Feature added by: Birger Kollstrand (MrKane) Feature #308589, revision 1 Title: Add button i Yast's printer GUI to open up the CUPS Web interface openSUSE-11.3: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Birger Kollstrand (mrkane) Description: For a user that has set up a printer que with yast it is not obvious how to manage that que. It would be a great improvment if the YAST gui could contain a button (Manage printer output)that would open the CUPS web interfcace. localhost:631 -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/308589

1 0

[New: openFATE 308588] giant link list
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 20 Dec '09

20 Dec '09

Feature added by: Kyle McMacken (75020780) Feature #308588, revision 1 Title: giant link list Package Wishlist: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Kyle McMacken (75020780) Description: stupid funny videos (http://www.giantlinklist.com) -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/308588

1 0

[New: openFATE 308587] klatexformula: generate images from latex equations
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Dec '09

18 Dec '09

Feature added by: Philippe Faist (phfaist) Feature #308587, revision 1 Title: klatexformula: generate images from latex equations Package Wishlist: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Philippe Faist (phfaist) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: I would like to suggest adding the application klatexformula to the official openSuSE distribution. Description This application provides an easy-to-use graphical user interface for generating images from LaTeX equations. These images can be dragged and dropped or copied and pasted into external applications (presentations, text documents, graphics...), or can be saved to disk in a variety of formats (PNG, JPG, BMP, EPS, PDF, etc.). In addition to the graphical user interface, a command-line interface and a C++ library is provided to perform the same job. http://klatexformula.sourceforge.net/ (http://klatexformula.sourceforge.net/) A home project containing this package (but RPM is not garanteed to be suse-standard-compliant) : home:/phfaist Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: This application, in my humble opinion, is useful for * inserting equations in (e.g. OpenOffice.org) presentations and documents * editing and previewing LaTeX equations (when editing long documents) and could possibly be considered as part of a standard LaTeX distribution, or a standard option thereof. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/308587

1 1

[openFATE 120340] Run download and install in parallel
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Dec '09

18 Dec '09

Feature changed by: Robert Davies (robopensuse) Feature #120340, revision 131 Title: Run download and install in parallel openSUSE-10.2: Rejected by Klaus Kämpf (kwk) reject date: 2006-08-09 11:36:10 reject reason: Not possible in 10.2 timeframe Priority Requester: Important openSUSE-10.3: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) reject date: 2007-08-01 10:25:01 reject reason: Out of time. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Jiri Srain (jsrain) reject date: 2008-03-28 13:56:11 reject reason: Out of resources for 11.0. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) reject date: 2008-07-11 12:06:35 reject reason: This needs to wait. Postponing. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.2: Rejected by Christoph Thiel (cthiel1) reject date: 2009-06-03 08:43:03 reject reason: No resources for 11.2. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.3: Evaluation Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important Requested by: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) Requested by: Peter Poeml (poeml) Requested by: Reinhard Max (rmax) Description: Network installation could be improved by running package download and package installation in parallel. References: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=60844 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=209799 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=128050 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=370457 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=370054 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=385711 http://en.opensuse.org/Libzypp/Failover http://metalinker.org/ Fate #300660: Download package groups before install Discussion: #2: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2006-08-09 11:36:42) Michael already looked at this. Should be further evaluated for 10.3 #3: Edith Parzefall (emapedl) (2007-07-31 16:56:12) Problem is: what do we do if we lost the network connection when only half the packages are installed? #7: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2008-04-10 11:42:43) (reply to #3) I think this is a general problem for network based installations. Can you elaborate if/why you see this as a special problem when download and installation are running in parallel? #8: Peter Poeml (poeml) (2008-05-19 14:49:53) (reply to #7) For reliable operation of a business critical server, it is a must that packages are downloaded first, before the installation/update is started. Otherwise a network outage can lead to a broken system which is half updated. So if parallel download/install is implemented (for desktop users, maybe...) then please make sure that it is possible to disable it. #9: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2008-05-19 16:01:15) (reply to #8) As we just sorted out on IRC, the current implementation also doesn't allow to complete download before starting installation and the feature proposed here wouldn't make this worse. But as the wish of server admins to have all packages downloaded before starting to install them is very valid, I think we should extend this feature request to contain that requirement as well, and probably rename it to "decouple download and installation". If download and installation are properly decoupled, it should just be a matter of the parameters the algorithm is called with to get one of the following behaviours: * Download and install packages one by one (as it is now) * Keep downloading subsequent packages while installing (as originally proposed here) * Use a fixed-size download cache for flow control between download an installations (in situations where download is faster than installation and disk space is limited) * Download all packages of an update or installation and install them afterwards (as requested by Peter for server admins) #10: Jiri Srain (jsrain) (2008-05-20 10:22:10) (reply to #9) We already do have similar feature: #300660: Download package groups before install #4: Edith Parzefall (emapedl) (2007-07-31 16:57:22) Please reject for 10.3. #5: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2008-01-10 16:23:46) This is included in the ZYpp plan for 11.0, however implementation will start after beta. Will keep in evaluation, it depends on other milestones for beta1 #14: Chris Hills (chaz6) (2009-02-16 16:42:06) Is there a feature request to install using both the base and updates repo so that the latest packages available at install-time are used, thus saving bandwidth? #15: Jiri Srain (jsrain) (2009-02-17 08:45:38) (reply to #14) This is how it works for quite some time. Repositories providing patches also provide the packages so that they can be installed directly from the update repositories (provided they contain newer version). #16: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2009-06-02 15:18:00) For 11.2 we will focus on flexibility of the download and install order (like installing after everything is downloaded), however parallel stuff should be done after we have this in place. Please reject. #20: Jörn Knie-von Allmen (phisiker) (2009-08-05 12:12:29) (reply to #16) Please do not reject. With a downloadprotocol this should be solvable. The Installtask can poll an that protocol (or be informed by a Signal when a download has ended. This is better then polling. Or if prefering an IPC-Framework: D-BUS. Never mind!). Such problems I had some times often to solve (but in Java) and generally, it isn't so dificult. #21: Ralph Ulrich (ulenrich) (2009-08-05 13:03:25) (reply to #20) Please reject forever: As operating system are sort of highly integrated databases there should be a commit like funcutionality: First download then install (like debian). Otherwise repositories representing a rolling release (factory) will potentially break an updating system. #22: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2009-08-06 16:18:54) (reply to #21) Yes, there are situations where this (optional) feature should better not be used, but that does not mean it should not be implemented, because there are many situations where it can be very useful. BTW, how would "download then install" give you anything near commit- like functionality? Factory could still change on the server while you are downloading and packages could still fail during installation, leaving you with an inconsistent installation. #24: Ralph Ulrich (ulenrich) (2009-08-11 23:42:59) (reply to #22) Yes, "still fail during installation": there is no commit-like functionality But in case of a changed Factory repository there would be an error: zypper dup --download-then-install || ( zypper ref && zypper dup) || ... In this more often case there would be a commit-like functionality #25: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2009-08-12 11:22:08) (reply to #24) I think the most common case is end users installing from mostly static repositories such as the original release and the official updates. That's what I had in mind when I first suggested this feature many many years ago when there was no openSUSE or Factory. So, please don't insist in this feature being rejected just because you don't have a usecase for it yourself. Nobody will force you to use it if you don't want to. #23: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2009-08-06 16:20:58) (reply to #16) As I've explained in comment #9, the different modes of operation would have been possible with a single implementation and different runtime parameters. I think this would actually be easier than implementing the different modes separately, so why hasn't it been considered? #17: Michal Papis (mpapis) (2009-07-04 20:58:23) I think great example here may be Gentoo, there You can chose the way of getting packages, by default download and installation go in paraler, but it is possible to get first sources and then run build/installation. If you are on the default and something breaks, ex. network, Yuo can always resume the last download&installation task. #18: Giuseppe Salinaro (superpeppo89) (2009-07-16 19:37:27) (reply to #17) This idea of gentoo is good... #19: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-07-20 10:59:31) (reply to #18) Guys, as Duncan wrote in c#16, we are already developing the "download all, install all" mode (currently we only have "download one, install one, ..."), and yes, users will be able to choose one of these. This particular feature would be an improvement of the current mode: "download one, install one while downloading others, ...". I hope this clarifies the current status a bit. #26: Eduard Avetisyan (dich) (2009-09-15 09:16:15) (reply to #19) Sorry Jan, I think both "download one, install one, download next, install next..." and " download all, install all" are both MUCH slower than " download one, install one, download next in parallel ". Come on guys, you focused on two SLOW modes and left the only fast one for future, and that's since 5 versions! Why not reserve a couple of hundred MB (customizable) of diskspace and cache the downloads there while installing in the meantime. Hope it's not too late to think of it for os11.2... #27: Michael Kromer (mkromer) (2009-10-23 01:11:45) (reply to #26) Absolutely: I agree with you Eduard. The optimized way is to run a download process while rpm -{i,U} is running in the background, as all resources (Disk I/O, CPU, Net) can get used parallel. The only trick is to keep the installation of following packages on hold, if there is some kind of package which takes longer (like kernel-{default,source}; to keep --requires safe; example: kmp's which rely on the specific kernel version to be installed first, however even this could be developed in an optimized way, as package lists and therefore also package requirements are available at time of download). I think there would even be real great customization options possible like an option such as --download-threads. So if the installation/upgrade can keep up with the downloadspeed you will get *significant* performance. And even if not -> it could never get slower. #31: Bart Otten (bartotten) (2009-11-08 13:46:41) (reply to #26) Guess it is too late for for 11.2 but I think Eduard and Michael made a good point. This request is old, even before openFATE was for public... #32: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-11-09 11:25:45) (reply to #26) Well, whether we should do one thing first and then the other, that's debatable, but the point is we do want this downloading while installing . The only issue here are the resources and priorities. Now that we have the first, we can hopefully move on to the next for 11.3 #37: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-12-18 15:19:01) (reply to #32) #306966: [Beta2] No Shutdown/Suspend During Package Update https://features.opensuse.org/306966 is proposing making the slow disk Hog option DownloadInAdvance the default claiming practical integrity benefits, so this most popular feature request is needed to be implemented for 11.3 to mitigate end-user annoyance. #38: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2009-12-18 16:03:54) (reply to #37) Yeah, like if disk space would be a big problem nowadays compared with battery duration + #39: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-12-18 16:40:21) (reply to #38) + Some people have netbooks with relatively limited space, SSD's are + likely to become more popular to. So it is not just older machines + with smaller disks. Improving battery life by reducing the time the + disk needs to be spun up rather than idle, is just another reason to + offer parallel download/install option. #28: Reza Davoudi (rd1381) (2009-10-27 14:35:07) plz make it so that it be an option in GUI not just command line i am sick of going through cmdline flags and options #29: John Bester (johnbester) (2009-10-29 07:13:05) I think the proposed sulotion will help, but to me this is not the real important issue. The most frustrating issue around installing a small package using YaST is the repository upgrade that must complete before you can do anything. (Unfortunately we do not all have the internet speeds as are the norm in Europe and US). The worst is actually when you have your laptop somewhere where you do not have internet access and have to wait for connection timeouts before you can do an installation. It happened a few times that I just wanted to install a small tool which slipped my mind when I did a clean install (such as midnight commander) quickly so that I can continue with what I am doing. At this point I am not fussed about having the absolute latest security fix - I just need to get going. In any case, I would propose that when you open the package manager, it should kick off a thread to download repository updates into a temp folder. The next time you start the package manader, it can simply replace those repositories for which there are updates available in the temp folder. My reasoning is: If I opened the package manager yesterday and I open it again today (and maybe again later today), why should I always wait a few minutes before I can start selecting packages? Switching off the refresh feature in "Software repostories" is not an option, because it takes too long and you typically do not want it switched off. #30: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2009-10-29 09:59:10) (reply to #29) Please open a new feature request for your proposal, as it is unrelated to the feature that is being discussed here. #33: Fco. Javier Nacher (xiscoj) (2009-12-07 09:39:04) hi, why don't we learn from another package managers?. I usually use smart ( http://labix.org/smart (http://labix.org/smart) ), I think it working mode is the apropiate. It downloads in parallel and after downloading all packages, installs them sequentially, also allows to update channels pressing a button only on demand, so it opens faster. I think that parallel install is not a good choice but parallel download is more than recommended. #34: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2009-12-07 11:01:03) (reply to #33) You missunderstood the feature. The feature talks about downloading multiple files at the same time, and installing what is possible to install at the same time. It does not implies that multiple packages are installed in parallel (however it does not discard it). You give no reason when stating that "parallel install is not a good choice". Downloading in parallel is something we will do anyways. However, as we have DownloadInAdvance and DownloadInHeaps, we can download group of packages that form a minimal dependency transaction. I doubt smart has this information. This would allow us to download the maximum amount of packages (either sequential or in paralell) that can be downloaded and installed while leaving the system in a consistent state. Those could be installed in parallel while the next "heap" or group is downloaded. Any error in the next download would leave the system still in a consistent state. So yes, we should learn from smart, yum and others, but we should not just copy, as we don't have all the limitations they do have, and that means we can actually try to improve things. #35: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-12-07 21:21:45) (reply to #34) It is possible to grab the small "odds & sods" together that start being downloaded early in install even if they are logically independant? The trouble I notice on network install, is that there's many small packages not particularly important packages, which don't let the TCP/IP download get to decent speed, making things crawl early on at nowhere near usual bandwidth. So a strategy, like a browser of getting small files in parrallel, whilst mainly wanting those large consistent sets you mention, might make things look pleasingly snappy, rather than naive. Of course if a large package were to be downloaded, as the small ones arrive and are installed noone would complain. #36: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-12-10 16:21:39) Testing out Kubuntu 9.10, and one of early things it does on starting Konqi, is suggest installing "restricted" multia-media codecs. The downloads were fast, stating off at full 10Mb/s, just tailing off a touch after a while. Similarly installing 110 bug fix updates took only a few minutes, despite requiring full kernel download. By comparison, though zypper itself is fast searching in DB, getting the repo info and sequence of small files, can really keep the end user waiting with alot of under-utilised bandwidth. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/120340

1 0

[openFATE 120340] Run download and install in parallel
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Dec '09

18 Dec '09

Feature changed by: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) Feature #120340, revision 130 Title: Run download and install in parallel openSUSE-10.2: Rejected by Klaus Kämpf (kwk) reject date: 2006-08-09 11:36:10 reject reason: Not possible in 10.2 timeframe Priority Requester: Important openSUSE-10.3: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) reject date: 2007-08-01 10:25:01 reject reason: Out of time. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Jiri Srain (jsrain) reject date: 2008-03-28 13:56:11 reject reason: Out of resources for 11.0. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) reject date: 2008-07-11 12:06:35 reject reason: This needs to wait. Postponing. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.2: Rejected by Christoph Thiel (cthiel1) reject date: 2009-06-03 08:43:03 reject reason: No resources for 11.2. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.3: Evaluation Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important Requested by: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) Requested by: Peter Poeml (poeml) Requested by: Reinhard Max (rmax) Description: Network installation could be improved by running package download and package installation in parallel. References: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=60844 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=209799 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=128050 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=370457 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=370054 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=385711 http://en.opensuse.org/Libzypp/Failover http://metalinker.org/ Fate #300660: Download package groups before install Discussion: #2: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2006-08-09 11:36:42) Michael already looked at this. Should be further evaluated for 10.3 #3: Edith Parzefall (emapedl) (2007-07-31 16:56:12) Problem is: what do we do if we lost the network connection when only half the packages are installed? #7: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2008-04-10 11:42:43) (reply to #3) I think this is a general problem for network based installations. Can you elaborate if/why you see this as a special problem when download and installation are running in parallel? #8: Peter Poeml (poeml) (2008-05-19 14:49:53) (reply to #7) For reliable operation of a business critical server, it is a must that packages are downloaded first, before the installation/update is started. Otherwise a network outage can lead to a broken system which is half updated. So if parallel download/install is implemented (for desktop users, maybe...) then please make sure that it is possible to disable it. #9: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2008-05-19 16:01:15) (reply to #8) As we just sorted out on IRC, the current implementation also doesn't allow to complete download before starting installation and the feature proposed here wouldn't make this worse. But as the wish of server admins to have all packages downloaded before starting to install them is very valid, I think we should extend this feature request to contain that requirement as well, and probably rename it to "decouple download and installation". If download and installation are properly decoupled, it should just be a matter of the parameters the algorithm is called with to get one of the following behaviours: * Download and install packages one by one (as it is now) * Keep downloading subsequent packages while installing (as originally proposed here) * Use a fixed-size download cache for flow control between download an installations (in situations where download is faster than installation and disk space is limited) * Download all packages of an update or installation and install them afterwards (as requested by Peter for server admins) #10: Jiri Srain (jsrain) (2008-05-20 10:22:10) (reply to #9) We already do have similar feature: #300660: Download package groups before install #4: Edith Parzefall (emapedl) (2007-07-31 16:57:22) Please reject for 10.3. #5: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2008-01-10 16:23:46) This is included in the ZYpp plan for 11.0, however implementation will start after beta. Will keep in evaluation, it depends on other milestones for beta1 #14: Chris Hills (chaz6) (2009-02-16 16:42:06) Is there a feature request to install using both the base and updates repo so that the latest packages available at install-time are used, thus saving bandwidth? #15: Jiri Srain (jsrain) (2009-02-17 08:45:38) (reply to #14) This is how it works for quite some time. Repositories providing patches also provide the packages so that they can be installed directly from the update repositories (provided they contain newer version). #16: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2009-06-02 15:18:00) For 11.2 we will focus on flexibility of the download and install order (like installing after everything is downloaded), however parallel stuff should be done after we have this in place. Please reject. #20: Jörn Knie-von Allmen (phisiker) (2009-08-05 12:12:29) (reply to #16) Please do not reject. With a downloadprotocol this should be solvable. The Installtask can poll an that protocol (or be informed by a Signal when a download has ended. This is better then polling. Or if prefering an IPC-Framework: D-BUS. Never mind!). Such problems I had some times often to solve (but in Java) and generally, it isn't so dificult. #21: Ralph Ulrich (ulenrich) (2009-08-05 13:03:25) (reply to #20) Please reject forever: As operating system are sort of highly integrated databases there should be a commit like funcutionality: First download then install (like debian). Otherwise repositories representing a rolling release (factory) will potentially break an updating system. #22: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2009-08-06 16:18:54) (reply to #21) Yes, there are situations where this (optional) feature should better not be used, but that does not mean it should not be implemented, because there are many situations where it can be very useful. BTW, how would "download then install" give you anything near commit- like functionality? Factory could still change on the server while you are downloading and packages could still fail during installation, leaving you with an inconsistent installation. #24: Ralph Ulrich (ulenrich) (2009-08-11 23:42:59) (reply to #22) Yes, "still fail during installation": there is no commit-like functionality But in case of a changed Factory repository there would be an error: zypper dup --download-then-install || ( zypper ref && zypper dup) || ... In this more often case there would be a commit-like functionality #25: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2009-08-12 11:22:08) (reply to #24) I think the most common case is end users installing from mostly static repositories such as the original release and the official updates. That's what I had in mind when I first suggested this feature many many years ago when there was no openSUSE or Factory. So, please don't insist in this feature being rejected just because you don't have a usecase for it yourself. Nobody will force you to use it if you don't want to. #23: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2009-08-06 16:20:58) (reply to #16) As I've explained in comment #9, the different modes of operation would have been possible with a single implementation and different runtime parameters. I think this would actually be easier than implementing the different modes separately, so why hasn't it been considered? #17: Michal Papis (mpapis) (2009-07-04 20:58:23) I think great example here may be Gentoo, there You can chose the way of getting packages, by default download and installation go in paraler, but it is possible to get first sources and then run build/installation. If you are on the default and something breaks, ex. network, Yuo can always resume the last download&installation task. #18: Giuseppe Salinaro (superpeppo89) (2009-07-16 19:37:27) (reply to #17) This idea of gentoo is good... #19: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-07-20 10:59:31) (reply to #18) Guys, as Duncan wrote in c#16, we are already developing the "download all, install all" mode (currently we only have "download one, install one, ..."), and yes, users will be able to choose one of these. This particular feature would be an improvement of the current mode: "download one, install one while downloading others, ...". I hope this clarifies the current status a bit. #26: Eduard Avetisyan (dich) (2009-09-15 09:16:15) (reply to #19) Sorry Jan, I think both "download one, install one, download next, install next..." and " download all, install all" are both MUCH slower than " download one, install one, download next in parallel ". Come on guys, you focused on two SLOW modes and left the only fast one for future, and that's since 5 versions! Why not reserve a couple of hundred MB (customizable) of diskspace and cache the downloads there while installing in the meantime. Hope it's not too late to think of it for os11.2... #27: Michael Kromer (mkromer) (2009-10-23 01:11:45) (reply to #26) Absolutely: I agree with you Eduard. The optimized way is to run a download process while rpm -{i,U} is running in the background, as all resources (Disk I/O, CPU, Net) can get used parallel. The only trick is to keep the installation of following packages on hold, if there is some kind of package which takes longer (like kernel-{default,source}; to keep --requires safe; example: kmp's which rely on the specific kernel version to be installed first, however even this could be developed in an optimized way, as package lists and therefore also package requirements are available at time of download). I think there would even be real great customization options possible like an option such as --download-threads. So if the installation/upgrade can keep up with the downloadspeed you will get *significant* performance. And even if not -> it could never get slower. #31: Bart Otten (bartotten) (2009-11-08 13:46:41) (reply to #26) Guess it is too late for for 11.2 but I think Eduard and Michael made a good point. This request is old, even before openFATE was for public... #32: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-11-09 11:25:45) (reply to #26) Well, whether we should do one thing first and then the other, that's debatable, but the point is we do want this downloading while installing . The only issue here are the resources and priorities. Now that we have the first, we can hopefully move on to the next for 11.3 #37: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-12-18 15:19:01) (reply to #32) #306966: [Beta2] No Shutdown/Suspend During Package Update https://features.opensuse.org/306966 is proposing making the slow disk Hog option DownloadInAdvance the default claiming practical integrity benefits, so this most popular feature request is needed to be implemented for 11.3 to mitigate end-user annoyance. + #38: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2009-12-18 16:03:54) (reply to #37) + Yeah, like if disk space would be a big problem nowadays compared with + battery duration #28: Reza Davoudi (rd1381) (2009-10-27 14:35:07) plz make it so that it be an option in GUI not just command line i am sick of going through cmdline flags and options #29: John Bester (johnbester) (2009-10-29 07:13:05) I think the proposed sulotion will help, but to me this is not the real important issue. The most frustrating issue around installing a small package using YaST is the repository upgrade that must complete before you can do anything. (Unfortunately we do not all have the internet speeds as are the norm in Europe and US). The worst is actually when you have your laptop somewhere where you do not have internet access and have to wait for connection timeouts before you can do an installation. It happened a few times that I just wanted to install a small tool which slipped my mind when I did a clean install (such as midnight commander) quickly so that I can continue with what I am doing. At this point I am not fussed about having the absolute latest security fix - I just need to get going. In any case, I would propose that when you open the package manager, it should kick off a thread to download repository updates into a temp folder. The next time you start the package manader, it can simply replace those repositories for which there are updates available in the temp folder. My reasoning is: If I opened the package manager yesterday and I open it again today (and maybe again later today), why should I always wait a few minutes before I can start selecting packages? Switching off the refresh feature in "Software repostories" is not an option, because it takes too long and you typically do not want it switched off. #30: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2009-10-29 09:59:10) (reply to #29) Please open a new feature request for your proposal, as it is unrelated to the feature that is being discussed here. #33: Fco. Javier Nacher (xiscoj) (2009-12-07 09:39:04) hi, why don't we learn from another package managers?. I usually use smart ( http://labix.org/smart (http://labix.org/smart) ), I think it working mode is the apropiate. It downloads in parallel and after downloading all packages, installs them sequentially, also allows to update channels pressing a button only on demand, so it opens faster. I think that parallel install is not a good choice but parallel download is more than recommended. #34: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2009-12-07 11:01:03) (reply to #33) You missunderstood the feature. The feature talks about downloading multiple files at the same time, and installing what is possible to install at the same time. It does not implies that multiple packages are installed in parallel (however it does not discard it). You give no reason when stating that "parallel install is not a good choice". Downloading in parallel is something we will do anyways. However, as we have DownloadInAdvance and DownloadInHeaps, we can download group of packages that form a minimal dependency transaction. I doubt smart has this information. This would allow us to download the maximum amount of packages (either sequential or in paralell) that can be downloaded and installed while leaving the system in a consistent state. Those could be installed in parallel while the next "heap" or group is downloaded. Any error in the next download would leave the system still in a consistent state. So yes, we should learn from smart, yum and others, but we should not just copy, as we don't have all the limitations they do have, and that means we can actually try to improve things. #35: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-12-07 21:21:45) (reply to #34) It is possible to grab the small "odds & sods" together that start being downloaded early in install even if they are logically independant? The trouble I notice on network install, is that there's many small packages not particularly important packages, which don't let the TCP/IP download get to decent speed, making things crawl early on at nowhere near usual bandwidth. So a strategy, like a browser of getting small files in parrallel, whilst mainly wanting those large consistent sets you mention, might make things look pleasingly snappy, rather than naive. Of course if a large package were to be downloaded, as the small ones arrive and are installed noone would complain. #36: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-12-10 16:21:39) Testing out Kubuntu 9.10, and one of early things it does on starting Konqi, is suggest installing "restricted" multia-media codecs. The downloads were fast, stating off at full 10Mb/s, just tailing off a touch after a while. Similarly installing 110 bug fix updates took only a few minutes, despite requiring full kernel download. By comparison, though zypper itself is fast searching in DB, getting the repo info and sequence of small files, can really keep the end user waiting with alot of under-utilised bandwidth. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/120340

1 0

[openFATE 120340] Run download and install in parallel
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 18 Dec '09

18 Dec '09

Feature changed by: Robert Davies (robopensuse) Feature #120340, revision 129 Title: Run download and install in parallel openSUSE-10.2: Rejected by Klaus Kämpf (kwk) reject date: 2006-08-09 11:36:10 reject reason: Not possible in 10.2 timeframe Priority Requester: Important openSUSE-10.3: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) reject date: 2007-08-01 10:25:01 reject reason: Out of time. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Jiri Srain (jsrain) reject date: 2008-03-28 13:56:11 reject reason: Out of resources for 11.0. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) reject date: 2008-07-11 12:06:35 reject reason: This needs to wait. Postponing. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.2: Rejected by Christoph Thiel (cthiel1) reject date: 2009-06-03 08:43:03 reject reason: No resources for 11.2. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.3: Evaluation Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important Requested by: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) Requested by: Peter Poeml (poeml) Requested by: Reinhard Max (rmax) Description: Network installation could be improved by running package download and package installation in parallel. References: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=60844 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=209799 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=128050 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=370457 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=370054 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=385711 http://en.opensuse.org/Libzypp/Failover http://metalinker.org/ Fate #300660: Download package groups before install Discussion: #2: Klaus Kämpf (kwk) (2006-08-09 11:36:42) Michael already looked at this. Should be further evaluated for 10.3 #3: Edith Parzefall (emapedl) (2007-07-31 16:56:12) Problem is: what do we do if we lost the network connection when only half the packages are installed? #7: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2008-04-10 11:42:43) (reply to #3) I think this is a general problem for network based installations. Can you elaborate if/why you see this as a special problem when download and installation are running in parallel? #8: Peter Poeml (poeml) (2008-05-19 14:49:53) (reply to #7) For reliable operation of a business critical server, it is a must that packages are downloaded first, before the installation/update is started. Otherwise a network outage can lead to a broken system which is half updated. So if parallel download/install is implemented (for desktop users, maybe...) then please make sure that it is possible to disable it. #9: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2008-05-19 16:01:15) (reply to #8) As we just sorted out on IRC, the current implementation also doesn't allow to complete download before starting installation and the feature proposed here wouldn't make this worse. But as the wish of server admins to have all packages downloaded before starting to install them is very valid, I think we should extend this feature request to contain that requirement as well, and probably rename it to "decouple download and installation". If download and installation are properly decoupled, it should just be a matter of the parameters the algorithm is called with to get one of the following behaviours: * Download and install packages one by one (as it is now) * Keep downloading subsequent packages while installing (as originally proposed here) * Use a fixed-size download cache for flow control between download an installations (in situations where download is faster than installation and disk space is limited) * Download all packages of an update or installation and install them afterwards (as requested by Peter for server admins) #10: Jiri Srain (jsrain) (2008-05-20 10:22:10) (reply to #9) We already do have similar feature: #300660: Download package groups before install #4: Edith Parzefall (emapedl) (2007-07-31 16:57:22) Please reject for 10.3. #5: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2008-01-10 16:23:46) This is included in the ZYpp plan for 11.0, however implementation will start after beta. Will keep in evaluation, it depends on other milestones for beta1 #14: Chris Hills (chaz6) (2009-02-16 16:42:06) Is there a feature request to install using both the base and updates repo so that the latest packages available at install-time are used, thus saving bandwidth? #15: Jiri Srain (jsrain) (2009-02-17 08:45:38) (reply to #14) This is how it works for quite some time. Repositories providing patches also provide the packages so that they can be installed directly from the update repositories (provided they contain newer version). #16: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2009-06-02 15:18:00) For 11.2 we will focus on flexibility of the download and install order (like installing after everything is downloaded), however parallel stuff should be done after we have this in place. Please reject. #20: Jörn Knie-von Allmen (phisiker) (2009-08-05 12:12:29) (reply to #16) Please do not reject. With a downloadprotocol this should be solvable. The Installtask can poll an that protocol (or be informed by a Signal when a download has ended. This is better then polling. Or if prefering an IPC-Framework: D-BUS. Never mind!). Such problems I had some times often to solve (but in Java) and generally, it isn't so dificult. #21: Ralph Ulrich (ulenrich) (2009-08-05 13:03:25) (reply to #20) Please reject forever: As operating system are sort of highly integrated databases there should be a commit like funcutionality: First download then install (like debian). Otherwise repositories representing a rolling release (factory) will potentially break an updating system. #22: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2009-08-06 16:18:54) (reply to #21) Yes, there are situations where this (optional) feature should better not be used, but that does not mean it should not be implemented, because there are many situations where it can be very useful. BTW, how would "download then install" give you anything near commit- like functionality? Factory could still change on the server while you are downloading and packages could still fail during installation, leaving you with an inconsistent installation. #24: Ralph Ulrich (ulenrich) (2009-08-11 23:42:59) (reply to #22) Yes, "still fail during installation": there is no commit-like functionality But in case of a changed Factory repository there would be an error: zypper dup --download-then-install || ( zypper ref && zypper dup) || ... In this more often case there would be a commit-like functionality #25: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2009-08-12 11:22:08) (reply to #24) I think the most common case is end users installing from mostly static repositories such as the original release and the official updates. That's what I had in mind when I first suggested this feature many many years ago when there was no openSUSE or Factory. So, please don't insist in this feature being rejected just because you don't have a usecase for it yourself. Nobody will force you to use it if you don't want to. #23: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2009-08-06 16:20:58) (reply to #16) As I've explained in comment #9, the different modes of operation would have been possible with a single implementation and different runtime parameters. I think this would actually be easier than implementing the different modes separately, so why hasn't it been considered? #17: Michal Papis (mpapis) (2009-07-04 20:58:23) I think great example here may be Gentoo, there You can chose the way of getting packages, by default download and installation go in paraler, but it is possible to get first sources and then run build/installation. If you are on the default and something breaks, ex. network, Yuo can always resume the last download&installation task. #18: Giuseppe Salinaro (superpeppo89) (2009-07-16 19:37:27) (reply to #17) This idea of gentoo is good... #19: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-07-20 10:59:31) (reply to #18) Guys, as Duncan wrote in c#16, we are already developing the "download all, install all" mode (currently we only have "download one, install one, ..."), and yes, users will be able to choose one of these. This particular feature would be an improvement of the current mode: "download one, install one while downloading others, ...". I hope this clarifies the current status a bit. #26: Eduard Avetisyan (dich) (2009-09-15 09:16:15) (reply to #19) Sorry Jan, I think both "download one, install one, download next, install next..." and " download all, install all" are both MUCH slower than " download one, install one, download next in parallel ". Come on guys, you focused on two SLOW modes and left the only fast one for future, and that's since 5 versions! Why not reserve a couple of hundred MB (customizable) of diskspace and cache the downloads there while installing in the meantime. Hope it's not too late to think of it for os11.2... #27: Michael Kromer (mkromer) (2009-10-23 01:11:45) (reply to #26) Absolutely: I agree with you Eduard. The optimized way is to run a download process while rpm -{i,U} is running in the background, as all resources (Disk I/O, CPU, Net) can get used parallel. The only trick is to keep the installation of following packages on hold, if there is some kind of package which takes longer (like kernel-{default,source}; to keep --requires safe; example: kmp's which rely on the specific kernel version to be installed first, however even this could be developed in an optimized way, as package lists and therefore also package requirements are available at time of download). I think there would even be real great customization options possible like an option such as --download-threads. So if the installation/upgrade can keep up with the downloadspeed you will get *significant* performance. And even if not -> it could never get slower. #31: Bart Otten (bartotten) (2009-11-08 13:46:41) (reply to #26) Guess it is too late for for 11.2 but I think Eduard and Michael made a good point. This request is old, even before openFATE was for public... #32: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-11-09 11:25:45) (reply to #26) Well, whether we should do one thing first and then the other, that's debatable, but the point is we do want this downloading while installing . The only issue here are the resources and priorities. Now that we have the first, we can hopefully move on to the next for 11.3 + #37: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-12-18 15:19:01) (reply to #32) + #306966: [Beta2] No Shutdown/Suspend During Package Update + https://features.opensuse.org/306966 is proposing making the slow disk + Hog option DownloadInAdvance the default claiming practical integrity + benefits, so this most popular feature request is needed to be + implemented for 11.3 to mitigate end-user annoyance. #28: Reza Davoudi (rd1381) (2009-10-27 14:35:07) plz make it so that it be an option in GUI not just command line i am sick of going through cmdline flags and options #29: John Bester (johnbester) (2009-10-29 07:13:05) I think the proposed sulotion will help, but to me this is not the real important issue. The most frustrating issue around installing a small package using YaST is the repository upgrade that must complete before you can do anything. (Unfortunately we do not all have the internet speeds as are the norm in Europe and US). The worst is actually when you have your laptop somewhere where you do not have internet access and have to wait for connection timeouts before you can do an installation. It happened a few times that I just wanted to install a small tool which slipped my mind when I did a clean install (such as midnight commander) quickly so that I can continue with what I am doing. At this point I am not fussed about having the absolute latest security fix - I just need to get going. In any case, I would propose that when you open the package manager, it should kick off a thread to download repository updates into a temp folder. The next time you start the package manader, it can simply replace those repositories for which there are updates available in the temp folder. My reasoning is: If I opened the package manager yesterday and I open it again today (and maybe again later today), why should I always wait a few minutes before I can start selecting packages? Switching off the refresh feature in "Software repostories" is not an option, because it takes too long and you typically do not want it switched off. #30: Reinhard Max (rmax) (2009-10-29 09:59:10) (reply to #29) Please open a new feature request for your proposal, as it is unrelated to the feature that is being discussed here. #33: Fco. Javier Nacher (xiscoj) (2009-12-07 09:39:04) hi, why don't we learn from another package managers?. I usually use smart ( http://labix.org/smart (http://labix.org/smart) ), I think it working mode is the apropiate. It downloads in parallel and after downloading all packages, installs them sequentially, also allows to update channels pressing a button only on demand, so it opens faster. I think that parallel install is not a good choice but parallel download is more than recommended. #34: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) (2009-12-07 11:01:03) (reply to #33) You missunderstood the feature. The feature talks about downloading multiple files at the same time, and installing what is possible to install at the same time. It does not implies that multiple packages are installed in parallel (however it does not discard it). You give no reason when stating that "parallel install is not a good choice". Downloading in parallel is something we will do anyways. However, as we have DownloadInAdvance and DownloadInHeaps, we can download group of packages that form a minimal dependency transaction. I doubt smart has this information. This would allow us to download the maximum amount of packages (either sequential or in paralell) that can be downloaded and installed while leaving the system in a consistent state. Those could be installed in parallel while the next "heap" or group is downloaded. Any error in the next download would leave the system still in a consistent state. So yes, we should learn from smart, yum and others, but we should not just copy, as we don't have all the limitations they do have, and that means we can actually try to improve things. #35: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-12-07 21:21:45) (reply to #34) It is possible to grab the small "odds & sods" together that start being downloaded early in install even if they are logically independant? The trouble I notice on network install, is that there's many small packages not particularly important packages, which don't let the TCP/IP download get to decent speed, making things crawl early on at nowhere near usual bandwidth. So a strategy, like a browser of getting small files in parrallel, whilst mainly wanting those large consistent sets you mention, might make things look pleasingly snappy, rather than naive. Of course if a large package were to be downloaded, as the small ones arrive and are installed noone would complain. #36: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-12-10 16:21:39) Testing out Kubuntu 9.10, and one of early things it does on starting Konqi, is suggest installing "restricted" multia-media codecs. The downloads were fast, stating off at full 10Mb/s, just tailing off a touch after a while. Similarly installing 110 bug fix updates took only a few minutes, despite requiring full kernel download. By comparison, though zypper itself is fast searching in DB, getting the repo info and sequence of small files, can really keep the end user waiting with alot of under-utilised bandwidth. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/120340

1 0

[openFATE 307903] Support automatic-debuginfo installation.
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 16 Dec '09

16 Dec '09

Feature added by: Michael Andres (mlandres) Feature #307903, revision 1 Title: Support automatic-debuginfo installation. openSUSE-11.3: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Neutral Requested by: Michael Andres (mlandres) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: YaST currently does not support automatic-debuginfo installation. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: See https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=237741 -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/307903

1 3

[New: openFATE 308518] Nautilus
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 16 Dec '09

16 Dec '09

Feature added by: Marco Calistri (amdturion) Feature #308518, revision 1 Title: Nautilus openFATE: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Marco Calistri (amdturion) Description: Wonder if someone can review Nautilus in terms of providing a bigger flexibility into it usage. For example: 1) if I try to open a .desktop file into ~.config/autostart, by right clicking on such file, then I cannot choose any editor to view/edit it 2) if I try to move/copy/cancel... a file into a folder wherein I have not permissions, Nautilus refuses, why don't offer to select a "su" option in order to avoid making such kind of operations by exiting Nautilus and using the terminal? TKS -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/308518

1 3

[openFATE 300758] Show unneeded packages
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 15 Dec '09

15 Dec '09

Feature changed by: Michael Schröder (mlschroe) Feature #300758, revision 108 Title: Show unneeded packages openSUSE-10.2: Rejected by Thorsten Kukuk (kukuk) 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) reject date: 2007-07-17 17:03:57 reject reason: Postponing. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Desirable openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov) 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) reject date: 2008-07-07 13:34:02 reject reason: Postponing, needs underlaying infrastructure to be fixed first. Priority Requester: Important openSUSE-11.2: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky (jkupec) reject date: 2009-11-30 14:20:26 reject reason: Marked as done by mistake. The feature is not done. Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Important openSUSE-11.3: New Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: JP Rosevear (jproseve) Description: The package manager should learn to show unneeded 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) #14: Michal Smrž (ilfirin) (2009-03-07 20:05:22) (reply to #11) I am afraid of using rpmorphan to do this. Cause last time, I tested it, it wants to remove libdvdnav and libdvdcss libraries. This is very bad. It leads to many not advanced users to ask in phorums "Why OpenSUSE is not playing DVDs anymore?" I see many problems this could make. #15: Christoph Thiel (cthiel1) (2009-04-21 15:23:06) We don't have the resources to implementing this. Seems to be a prefect fit for a community project. #17: Piotrek Juzwiak (benderbendingrodriguez) (2009-04-22 07:58:47) Maybe the idea to accomplish this would be simply by using the packages. xml file and diff it. We can already export what packages we got right? So if it would compare the packages.xml before installation and after it would then delete it. There is a problem when installing many packages, they would all have to be "grouped" which pulled which dependencies. #20: Vladimirs Kuzmins (vovachaka) (2009-10-26 16:27:51) This feature is a specially important, now when we have distro upgrade, which changes a lot of dependencies and a lot of obsolete packages remain installed. Please, someone implement it! #21: Thomas Göttlicher (tgoettlicher) (2009-10-26 16:41:29) I've added a view for orphaned packages in yast2-qt-pkg. There is a package group "orphaned packages" similar to "suggested packages" and "recommended packages" in yast2-qt-pkg version 2.18.17. #22: Atri Bhattacharya (badshah400) (2009-10-31 14:55:26) (reply to #21) Thanks for implementing this much needed feature. But this feature does not work with the gtk interface in 11.2 RC2; please have this added for the final release of 11.2. #23: Kornél Jahn (cornail) (2009-11-02 07:48:05) (reply to #21) Tried to test this but didn't seem to work on RC2: Orphaned packages view is empty. E.g. installed blender, which pulled yafray. After uninstalling blender, yafray remained installed but didn't show up as an orphaned package. Also installing audacity or inkscape pulled a lot of dependencies which were not showed as orphaned after uninstalling them. #24: Kornél Jahn (cornail) (2009-11-02 08:06:38) (reply to #23) Since it is marked as done, I filed a bug for it: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=551771 (https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=551771) #25: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-11-30 14:18:55) (reply to #21) There has been a misunderstanding here. What Thomas implemented is a view of packages that no longer have update candidates (those which are probably no longer maintained, thus 'orphaned'). This very fate request (IMO) incorrectly uses the word 'orphaned' for what is better described as "unused packages" or "no longer needed packages", or "unnecessary packages". Definitely not orphans (deborphan/rpmorphan is also a misfortunate name IMO). Anyway, whether orphan or unused, this feature is not implemented yet, thus i'm reopening it for 11.3. #26: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-11-30 14:21:27) reopening for 11.3 (see comment #25) #27: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-11-30 14:30:44) I suggest to call these packages unused instead of orphaned . I don't want to decide this by myself, so please speak up. Here are my arguments: 1) the word 'orphan' describes something that has lost its parent(s). In this case, it is actually the child that was lost - a package that depended on other package has been removed. The parent package is still installed, but there's no more use for it - it's unused . 2) we (and a few other distros and communities as well) already use orphaned to describe packages that are no longer cared for - unmaintained packages, packages dropped from distros. #28: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-11-30 15:05:21) (reply to #27) Thomas suggests that perhaps not needed (or no longer needed ) would be better than unused since 'unused' can be confused with 'not used by user' rather than 'not used by other packages'. #29: Roberto Mannai (robermann79) (2009-11-30 15:40:37) Undependent packages : packages which don't have any(more) dependency. #30: Kornél Jahn (cornail) (2009-11-30 16:15:08) I also support the not needed / no longer needed version. Orphaned is bad since it can be misunderstood, just like "undependent package", if Roberto meant to suggest it as a description for this phenomenon. Case A: If I install manually package X, which doesn't have any dependencies nor is it referred to by any other package, it is not a "not needed" one. 'Cause it was manually installed by the user. Case B: Package X is installed automatically as a dependency while installing package Y. Package Y is then removed, but X stays, with no other package referring to it as a dependency. X is then a "not needed" package. #31: Roberto Mannai (robermann79) (2009-11-30 17:00:02) (reply to #30) +1 Kornél Regarding Case A: of course "not needed package" is a subset "undependent package" - "not needed" catches the user's point of view and it is more precise. Nevertheless, determining that "not needed" packages is a hard job, so it could be a good starting point just knowing which are the "undependent" ones (at least as a first step). #32: Roberto Mannai (robermann79) (2009-11-30 17:47:05) (reply to #31) The user could have a graphical list of "undependent packages", which then he could mark each of them as "used/not used". The GUI then could suggest the "unused packages" for removal (this being a temporary but useful use case). #33: Ken Schneider (kensch) (2009-12-15 18:15:55) When you install a package using package management it checks to make sure all dependencies are also installed or adds them to the install list via the "Requires" feature. When de-installing the package check the list of "Requires" packages and see which ones can also be de- installed. That way there are no left over packages. If one of the "Requires" packages are also needed by other packages they are left installed. I am no where near being a programmer but that would seem to be simple to do. #34: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-12-15 18:47:57) (reply to #33) Such procedure would also wipe out packages that you still want to use. E.g. you have nagios-plugins-zypper, which requires zypper. Now, 'zypper remove nagios-plugins-zypper' would realize that after removing nagios-plugins-zypper nothing requires zypper, and would want to remove zypper as well. So what your idea lacks is a list of packages that were installed in the past based on explicit request by user. The procedure must avoid removing these. See also c#12 #36: Ján Kupec (jkupec) (2009-12-15 18:47:02) So i'm renaming this fate request to 'Show unneeded packages' (to make it shorter) to avoid further confustion. #37: Don Hughes (dehughes) (2009-12-15 19:10:53) I also would like to see this feature. I currently use rpmorphan with a list of things that it will mark that I know that I need. I also occationally go through yast2 and try to uninstall things that I do not recognize and see if they are flagged as being needed by something else. Both time consuming and error prone. And, a lot of packages seem to be some what careless in what the require for prereqs - pulling in KDE,gnome, and X11 packages on text- only machines for example; which then triggers a flood of KDE, gnome, and X11 library installations which I then have to mannually uninstall and mark as taboo. On my external facing servers I do not like to have any extra/unneeded/unwanted packages to provide possible attack vectors. - -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/300758

1 0