Feature added by: Michael Andres (mlandres)
Feature #312840, revision 1 Title: Evaluate libzypp thread safety
Hackweek VII: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Desirable
Requested by: Michael Andres (mlandres) Partner organization: openSUSE.org
Description: The are features like FATE#120340 asking for decoupling download and installation, also ideas to speed up initial repository refresh and loading by using parallelism.
But before this we need a minimum amount of thread safety in libzypp. I'd like to investigate if and how this is possible.
Feature changed by: Martin Vidner (mvidner) Feature #312840, revision 2 Title: Evaluate libzypp thread safety
Hackweek VII: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Desirable
Requested by: Michael Andres (mlandres) Partner organization: openSUSE.org
Description: The are features like FATE#120340 asking for decoupling download and installation, also ideas to speed up initial repository refresh and loading by using parallelism. But before this we need a minimum amount of thread safety in libzypp. I'd like to investigate if and how this is possible.
+ Discussion: + #1: Martin Vidner (mvidner) (2011-09-26 10:51:27) + Wouldn't it be easier and safer to use processes instead of threads?
Feature changed by: Karl Cheng (qantas94heavy) Feature #312840, revision 3 Title: Evaluate libzypp thread safety
- Hackweek VII: Unconfirmed + Hackweek VII: Rejected by Karl Cheng (qantas94heavy) + reject reason: Hackweek VII is over. Priority Requester: Desirable
Requested by: Michael Andres (mlandres) Partner organization: openSUSE.org
Description: The are features like FATE#120340 asking for decoupling download and installation, also ideas to speed up initial repository refresh and loading by using parallelism. But before this we need a minimum amount of thread safety in libzypp. I'd like to investigate if and how this is possible.
Discussion: #1: Martin Vidner (mvidner) (2011-09-26 10:51:27) Wouldn't it be easier and safer to use processes instead of threads?
-
fate_noreply＠suse.de