July 2011 - openSUSE Features - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[openFATE 305877] Popularity contest
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 25 Jul '11

25 Jul '11

Feature changed by: Andreas Jaeger (a_jaeger) Feature #305877, revision 41 Title: Popularity contest openSUSE-11.2: Rejected by Stephan Kulow (coolo) reject date: 2009-09-07 13:57:05 reject reason: No update, too late for 11.2 - and for the future I would rather see it integrated into smolt Priority Requester: Important Projectmanager: Desirable openSUSE-11.3: Rejected by Andreas Jaeger (a_jaeger) reject date: 2010-11-04 14:42:00 reject reason: Not done. Priority Requester: Desirable - openSUSE-11.4: New + openSUSE Distribution: Evaluation by engineering manager Priority Requester: Important - openSUSE Distribution: Unconfirmed - Priority - Requester: Important Requested by: Vladimir Nadvornik (nadvornik) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: We need a feedback about packages that are preferred by users and actively used. Debian already has a tool named Popularity contest (popcon) * reusing popcon will give us results that are directly comparable with Debian and Ubuntu * packagers team can take care of the package * we need a configuration dialog in YaST that is visible enough * we need a server infrastructure on opensuse.org. (There are certain privacy issues, see Debian FAQ for details) References: http://en.opensuse.org/BrainStorming_Prague#We_don.27t_know_which_packages_… http://popcon.debian.org/FAQ http://popcon.debian.org/ http://popcon.ubuntu.com/ Discussion: #1: Michal Vyskocil (mvyskocil) (2009-02-20 12:56:06) The pupularity-contest executable is a simple Perl script, which should be ported to rpm (replacing of dpkg calls by appropiate rpm alternative should be enough). #2: Pavol Rusnak (prusnak) (2009-03-11 15:53:13) (reply to #1) Replacing of dpkg calls with rpm is a no-go, because of the transactions in RPM. I started to work on a rewrite, will post results soon ... #3: Marek Stopka (m4r3k) (2009-03-13 09:28:08) (reply to #2) And here is a result... :-) http://stick.gk2.sk/blog/2009/03/popcorn-popularity-contest-for-rpm/ #4: Jay Mistry (zmdmw52) (2009-03-15 15:36:25) The software equivalent of Smolts Hardware profiler. Results can be uploaded to a dedicated website (such as is for Smolts- http://www.smolts.org/) so that users can see the relative weight/popularity of various commonly-used applications. #7: Carlos Gonçalves (cgoncalves) (2009-07-25 19:03:58) (reply to #4) There is a GSOC project (http://socghop.appspot.com/student_project/show/google/gsoc2009/gentoo/t124…) which is addressing this (Smolt) feature to Gentoo, though the author has been coding this aswell to Debian-based distros and more recently considering RPM distros too. I've been working with him on the client integration since I'm its author, and from my side all I can say is that Smolt sooner or later will be addressing this feature, too, but won't be ready in time for openSUSE 11.2 since feature/version freeze is next week (July 31). #5: T. J. Brumfield (enderandrew) (2009-06-13 21:16:54) During install, there can be a simple checkbox such as "Share hardware/software details with openSUSE servers for profiling." #6: Stephan Kulow (coolo) (2009-06-24 11:29:15) first we need the package in and someone to maintain the server or contact debian if they host other distros too. #9: 6tr6tr 6tr6tr (6tr6tr) (2010-10-01 20:16:28) I would actually prefer that things not just have one ranking but: 1. Trustworthiness 2. Privacy 3. Reliability/Uptime/Speed 4. Popularity I think those are all important and very different requirements. #10: Ionuț Arțăriși (mapleoin) (2011-03-31 13:31:57) Is there anyone still working on this? AFAIU there is more work to be done on the server. If that is correct, I might be able to help. + #11: Andreas Jaeger (a_jaeger) (2011-07-25 15:39:03) (reply to #10) + I'm not aware that anybody is working on this. If you are interested, + please go ahead and move this forward. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/305877

1 0

[openFATE 307172] Remove unneeded packages
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 23 Jul '11

23 Jul '11

Feature added by: Martin Marx (nitro424) Feature #307172, revision 1 Title: Remove unneeded packages openSUSE-11.3: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Martin Marx (nitro424) Description: I need a possibility to remove unneeded, automaticly installed software (orphans). Ubuntu example: apt-get autoremove Mandriva example: urpme packagename (Invoke it simply with urpme packagename to remove a package and any packages that depend on it.) Arch Linux example: pacman -Rsn; pacman -Rsnc; pacman -Qdt; this is my favorite I like to install and try different software. After trying it, I often want to remove it completely. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/307172

1 4

[openFATE 306627] depencency tracking for uninstalling
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 23 Jul '11

23 Jul '11

Feature added by: Jacques Boulet (oneinch) Feature #306627, revision 1 Title: depencency tracking for uninstalling openSUSE-11.3: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Jacques Boulet (oneinch) Description: The openSuSE package management is virtually unbeatable in the dependency tracking for installing department. But when it comes to uninstalling it really leaves little to be desired. It would be great if YAST and zypper kept track of the dependencies that were installed for a specific package during its install and checked the dependencies during the uninstall to see if they are in use by something else or not. And if not then give the ability to remove the unused dependencies. For example I install package "Foo" the requires library "Bar." Library "Bar" is not installed so it gets installed when I install "Foo." Later I realize the package "Foo" wasn't exactly what I needed and wish to remove it. But uninstalling just removes the package "Foo" and leaves the library "Bar" sitting around unused and taking up space. So if I want to remove the library "Bar" i must do so manually. It would be great if I wish to uninstall "Foo" that the package manager would have the ability to check any dependencies that were needed and installed for package "Foo" and see if they are still needed by another package or lib and if so, keep it, and if not remove it. Also, it would be awesome if one could remove an entire package group such as uninstalling gnome or KDE. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/306627

1 4

[openFATE 306438] yast2 sw_single should provide a view of packages where no other packages depends on
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 23 Jul '11

23 Jul '11

Feature added by: Michael Calmer (mcalmer) Feature #306438, revision 1, last change by Title: yast2 sw_single should provide a view of packages where no other packages depends on openSUSE-11.2: New Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Michael Calmer (mcalmer) Description: If I want to cleanup a workstation and remove packages which I do not need anymore I be able to know some package names which I have really selected for installation. But such packages pullin some dependencies which I am not aware of and so the number of packages growth and growth. A view, which shows me all packages where no other package depends on would help me to find packages I can remove without breaking dependencies. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/306438

1 3

[openFATE 306436] Filter for Leaf Packages in Software Management
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 23 Jul '11

23 Jul '11

Feature changed by: Moqi Ba (bamoqi) Feature #306436, revision 5 Title: Filter for Leaf Packages in Software Management openSUSE-11.2: Duplicate of #300758 + Master status: Rejected by Ján Kupec <jano(a)opensuse.org> + reject date: 2009-11-30 14:20:26 + reject reason: Marked as done by mistake. The feature is not done. Priority Requester: Mandatory openSUSE-11.3: Duplicate of #300758 + Master status: Done Priority Requester: Mandatory Requested by: Berthold Gunreben (azouhr) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: I'd like to see a new Filter in the Software Management of YaST that enables the user to see "Leaf" packages that do not provide functionality needed by other packages. This would make it easier for customers to remove unneeded packages from the system. Discussion: #1: Rémy Marquis (spyhawk) (2009-05-15 16:50:20) Strongly related to Feature 300758 (orphaned packages). To be marked as a duplicate. See https://features.opensuse.org/300758 -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/306436

1 0

[openFATE 305992] Easier removal of packages installed due dependencies and not manually by user
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 23 Jul '11

23 Jul '11

Feature added by: Nikanth K (nikanth) Feature #305992, revision 1, last change by Title: Easier removal of packages installed due dependencies and not manually by user openSUSE-11.2: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Nikanth K (nikanth) Description: If one tries to install a package say "bzflag-debugsource", then due to dependency "bzflag-debuginfo" also gets installed. But later the user may not remember it and will uninstall only "bzflag-debugsource". So installing and uninstalling, "bzflag-debugsource", does not leave the system in the same state as before. It would be nice if yast2/zypper can remember the automatic package selections and prompt user when the actual packages are being uninstalled and there are no other package that is still dependent on them. Atleast a way to know the list of packages installed due to dependencies and the no of packages still dependent on them would make it easier for the user. And this list should not include packages manually installed by the user. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/305992

1 4

[openFATE 300758] Show unneeded packages
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 23 Jul '11

23 Jul '11

Feature changed by: Moqi Ba (bamoqi) Feature #300758, revision 134 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 Ján Kupec (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: Done Priority Requester: Desirable Projectmanager: Important Requested by: JP Rosevear (jproseve) Partner organization: openSUSE.org 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. #39: Rafael Belmonte (eaglescreen) (2010-01-10 22:43:40) Hello, this is one of the main causes of I use more Debian/Ubuntu than OpenSuse. Debian & Ubuntu already have this implemented. I think this is a fundamental aspect to work in OpenSuse. Debian & Ubuntu can distinguish packages that were manually installed and packages that were installed just to satisfy dependencies. OpenSuse needs to do this too. #40: Tim Edwards (tk83) (2010-01-27 15:46:00) I'd also like to see this, Mandriva added it in a couple of releases ago and it's great. It's really missing in Opensuse #41: Eduard Huguet (eduardhc) (2010-03-02 15:55:43) (reply to #40) Agreed. Being a long time user of both Gentoo and Ubuntu, I was really shocked to discover that zypper was lacking this feature. Even more: when talking about Linux with friends I always make mention of this kind of "autoremove unneeded" option as one of the strong points of Linux package managing systems, as I was really taking for granted that any package manager out there had this feature included... Regards. #42: Rémy Marquis (spyhawk) (2010-05-02 17:13:32) Michael Andres started to implement this feature in Libzypp 7.4, see http://lists.opensuse.org/zypp-devel/2010-04/msg00033.html #45: Robin Knapp (rknapp) (2010-07-14 13:00:55) (reply to #42) --clean-deps works indeed, but what about just showing unneeded packages? It's mentioned in http://en.opensuse.org/Product_highlights#Package_management_with_zypper but I haven't found any information about this feature. + #46: Moqi Ba (bamoqi) (2011-07-24 01:37:08) + This FATE is marked as done but as of 11.4 "zypper rm -u" doesn't work + without a package name. It cannot actively find and remove orphaned + package which are auto-installed, like "apt-get autoremove" does. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/300758

1 0

[New: openFATE 312671] Enhance YaST=>System=>BootLoader
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 22 Jul '11

22 Jul '11

Feature added by: Larry Finger (lwfinger) Feature #312671, revision 1 Title: Enhance YaST=>System=>BootLoader openSUSE Distribution: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Larry Finger (lwfinger) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: If I need to do a bisection to find a kernel fault, the number of kernels in the GRUB list gets very large. The existing code handles the edit of /boot/grub/menu.lst; however, the kernels and modules that correspond to a deleted entry are orphaned. A manual cleanup of /boot and /lib/modules is tedious. An optional delete of the kernel files and modules would eliminate the tedium. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/312671

1 0

[openFATE 307603] Migrate x86_32 architecture to i686
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 21 Jul '11

21 Jul '11

Feature added by: Refilwe Seete (ReferenceSeete) Feature #307603, revision 1 Title: Migrate x86_32 architecture to i686 openSUSE-11.3: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Refilwe Seete (referenceseete) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: openSUSE currently builds i586 binaries with a couple exceptions. As it currently stands openSUSE 11.1 permits a Pentium 1 but requires at least 256MB of RAM with 512MB recommended [1]. The likelihood of a person having a system with an original Pentium and 256MB (esp. 512MB) of RAM is quite low. Since the i686 architecture was introduced in 1995...2010 or 2011 is a suitable time to migrate the x86_32 target architecture without adversely affecting the majority of users. The Fedora Project is making this same transition for Fedora 12 [2]. Any growing pains they experience can be used as guidance for the transition in openSUSE 11.3 or 12.0. [1] http://www.novell.com/products/opensuse/sysreqs.html [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/F12X86Support Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: By moving to i686, openSUSE should receive a slight performance increase while maintaining support for an incredibly broad range of x86 chips. Any boost is helpful on systems with less processing power, such as netbooks/nettops or older systems (Pentium 2, original Athlon etc.). Moving to i686 is a way to boost performance the performance of openSUSE at the margins without having to delve into experimental or otherwise under-tested methods. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/307603

1 12

[New: openFATE 312299] xz compression for livecd
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 21 Jul '11

21 Jul '11

Feature added by: Ben Li (gtx75) Feature #312299, revision 1 Title: xz compression for livecd openSUSE Distribution: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Ben Li (gtx75) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Fedora 15 is going to use xz compression for their live cds http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/LZMA_for_Live_Images can we also have xz compression for opensuse livecds so more software can be bundled in? Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: more software on livecds -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/312299

1 6