Feature changed by: Stephan Kulow (coolo)
Feature #305168, revision 14
Title: default to relatime
openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov)
reject date: 2008-09-10 10:20:17
reject reason: This is too late for openSUSE 11.1. Postponing.
- openSUSE-11.2: New
+ openSUSE-11.2: Evaluation
Requested by: Michael Meeks (michael_meeks)
At least for desktops, we should reduce the memory and I/O thrash
caused by atime updates, by using relatime.
- bugreport from community (novell/bugzilla/id: 398616)
- Offers 'noatime' when 'relatime' is clearly better
#1: Robert Davies (robopensuse) (2009-01-16 15:52:09)
Bug #461829 is not requesting breaking POSIX semantics by default!
relatime should replace noatime option in the mount options part of
partioner tool, especially now it has been improved to update atime on
file access if it's older than 24 hours.
Standards are important, and LRU file caches cannot be relied on if
noatime usage is common, or if poor backup software touches atimes,
when reading files.
#2: Sven Burmeister (rabauke) (2009-01-23 01:09:47)
11.1 is out and 11.2 getting started. Did anyone hear of ubuntu
suffering from using relatime by default? If not, it seems likely that
there are little to none issues.
+ #3: Stephan Kulow (coolo) (2009-05-08 16:51:21)
+ Matthias, I would think the easiest solution is replacing the current
+ checkbox "use noatime" with "use relatime" and make it default
+ (possibly per product). atime is a major pain for many systems where
+ powersave and co are affected.
Feature added by: Michael Löffler (michl19)
Feature #306273, revision 1, last change by
Title: send email notification to infoprovider
Requested by: Michael Löffler (michl19)
If someone is set a infoprovider for a feature he/she can see this only through checking a feature once in a while or by following the opensuse-features mailing list. This not efficient and will in many cases result in no information by the infoprovider as he/she never get knowledge that some information is requested.
Someone created a feature but information is missing. If he/she can be informed by an email that there is some information missing the feature handling will improve a lot.
Feature changed by: Holger Sickenberg (holgisms)
Feature #304429, revision 10
Title: Package cache handling in yast
openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov)
reject date: 2008-07-11 21:45:10
reject reason: Postponing. Zypper already provides the functionality.
Requested by: Ladislav Slezak (lslezak)
Add a possibility to edit 'keeppackages' option in *.repo files.
The downloaded packages are not kept by default, but it should be
configurable by user.
The question is how it should be configurable. My suggestions are a
check box or an extra menu item in the repositoru manager (repositories.
+ Test Case:
+ * check if the installed version of yast2-packager is 2.18.0 or later,
+ with following command: $ rpm -q yast2-packager
+ * add a new Software Repository: open YaST2 -> Software -> Software
+ Repositories -> Add
+ * during adding the new Software Repositories flag "Keep Downloaded
+ * update a package: # zypper update -t <package name>
+ * check if the package rpm file was saved in local cache (default:
#2: Ladislav Slezak (lslezak) (2009-01-08 13:47:14)
Implemented in yast SVN trunk (will be in yast2-packager-2.18.0)
There is a new check box, similar to 'Enabled' and 'Autorefresh' check
Feature changed by: Karl Eichwalder (keichwa)
Feature #302306, revision 57
Title: Reorganization of YaST control center
openSUSE-10.3: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov)
reject date: 2007-07-03 17:08:02
reject reason: Postponing, we are running out of time.
openSUSE-11.0: Rejected by Stanislav Visnovsky (visnov)
reject date: 2008-04-25 15:09:31
reject reason: Needs more discussion.
openSUSE-11.1: Rejected by Federico Lucifredi (flucifredi)
reject date: 2008-07-18 18:56:09
reject reason: postponing as per engineering's request.
Requested by: Martin Schmidkunz (mschmidkunz)
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
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
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
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.
This would require a lot of changes throughout the manuals.
#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
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
#8: Siegfried Olschner (sdolschn) (2007-07-03 12:35:30)
The results of the the cardsort study are available at:
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.,
#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:
#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
#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
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
+ #24: Karl Eichwalder (keichwa) (2009-05-08 07:37:16)
+ For what's worth, things got worse in the meantime ;) This feature
+ needs to be split into 2 or 3 subfeatures:
+ * Improve labels (e.g., "/etc/sysconfig Editor" -> "Sysconfig Editor").
+ * Reorganize groups: Move items from "Other" to Miscellaneous, split
+ Network Services into Network Servers and Network Clients, make the
+ Apparmor entries one entry and move it to Security, make Virtualization
+ entries one entry and move it to System, move Hostnames from Network
+ Services to Network Devices and rename Network Devices to "Network
+ Devices and Hostnames".
+ * Improve the UI.
+ The Gnome CC is rahter pointless because its left navigation (?) is
+ just superfluous (ok, there is now "Common Tasks"...). Because YaST
+ contains more groups and especially entries, we need a way to hide or
+ collapse groups completely. (I do not like the KDE idea just to display
+ a subset of the entries of a group.)
+ BTW, the worst thing about yast's gtk ui is the idea of sorting groups
+ alphabetically. In English, happily "Hardware" comes before
Feature changed by: Hendrik Vogelsang (hennevogel)
Feature #306408, revision 6
Info Provider: Heidi Lahtinen (chrysantine)
Requested by: Hendrik Vogelsang (hennevogel)
This is a test feature.
#1: Hendrik Vogelsang (hennevogel) (2009-05-07 16:09:14)
please make a comment
#2: Hendrik Vogelsang (hennevogel) (2009-05-07 16:19:52)
this is a comment
#3: Hendrik Vogelsang (hennevogel) (2009-05-07 16:34:47) (reply to #2)
+ #4: Hendrik Vogelsang (hennevogel) (2009-05-07 16:45:19) (reply to #3)