stephan beal wrote:
On Wednesday 23 August 2006 16:39, suse@rio.vg wrote:
stephan beal wrote: We have? When was this? All I've seen is where every time we point yet another problem with it, they say "We are looking to improve that area". I've seen nothing about an actual redesign. From everything I've read from suse, zen/rug is here to stay.
i didn't say REPLACED, i said REWORKED. See the mail from from Anders Johansson, 2006.08.21 @ 3:00, for example.
You mean the one where he states "zmd is broken by implementation, not by design"? Or where he states "it's being worked on very actively, I don't think anything more can be usefully added, except bug reporting for new issues"? That's not very promising. That says they'll fix the bugs in the current design. That's not even a rework.
(and will promptly be deleted from every system I install and replaced with apt)
Again:
stephan beal wrote: ... so us bitching about it won't help much more.
They're painfully aware of the problems, as people on this list have done no end of letting them know about the problems.
Just because they don't want to hear it doesn't mean they shouldn't. When pressed, they'll try and list a set of new features that make the zen/rug system better, but most of the time, you could actually do that in the old version. At the same time, it can't even do what the previous version did, regardless of the speed issue. Even fou4s can deal with delta rpms! fou4s is a SHELL SCRIPT! If we don't keep up the pressure, the issue will be swept under the rug. Even now they're declaring things like "Well, the yum system uses large xml blobs, so there's not much we can do". This is precisely one of those "design" issues I've been talking about. I have a suspicion that they're not aware at the level of frustration amongst the user base. I have a feeling that they think the current system is good enough, once the edges are smoothed over, or have been ordered by Novell/Ximian to keep the current system, no matter what. Why is apt so much faster at installing? Here's one important clue: The repo update is SEPARATE from the install. i.e. When I want to install something, it uses the current data, downloads downloads the package, and installs it. I don't have to go through the process of updating all the repodata from the source. The cost of updating from the repo's can be very high. Apt's style lets me pull up the package management quickly install something, close it and move on.