On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Yamaban
On Mon, 9 Jan 2012 11:37, Roger Luedecke
wrote: On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 04:50 +0100, Yamaban wrote:
<snip>
PS: Sorry for the rant, but the polkit hassle is just to much to bear. The memory used by polkit and consorts can be used better elsewhere.
I forked this discussion since I didn't want the thread hijacked. I think your scheme is very reasonable. However, frankly policykit has rarely gotten in my way or caused trouble... only in KDE, and mostly with Apper.
Honestly, KPackageKit/Apper has been a thorn in our side long enough. I really haven't much hope of getting it settled. Plus, it is simply overkill for simply doing updates. And as a package management tool, it is inadequate for the way we do things. What I mean by the last statement is since we often have different versions of a piece of software in different repos, and many of us have those repos, Apper fails to show why there are duplicate packages and doesn't give the versions. This is sloppy at best, potentially dangerous at worst.
Sorry, thread-jacking wasn't my intention. More laying the blame where it belongs, and a proposal of a workaround.
On Apper's failings, I agree with you, but to be cautious: What info can apper get from the packagekit backend, all - incluing the different repos, repo-priorites, and depenencies?
If yes, then it's appers fault, and sloppy programming. If no, then packagekit should be held responsible.
It may also be the fault of the zypper packagekit backend, in which case it is the responsibility of the openSUSE developers who made the backend. Most of what I have been hearing indicates that this is, in fact, the primary culprit, although I have no firsthand knowledge to that effect. -Todd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kde+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kde+owner@opensuse.org