public inbox for development@lists.ipfire.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>
To: development@lists.ipfire.org
Subject: Re: Comments regarding the upgrade process
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 22:51:13 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1450824673.2928.25.camel@ipfire.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <op.x92hhtkhcahio0@honk.fritz.box>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1958 bytes --]

On Tue, 2015-12-22 at 23:45 +0100, Larsen wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 23:36:35 +0100, Michael Tremer  
> <michael.tremer(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I am afraid that I must disappoint you on some of these points.
> > pakfire
> > in IPFire 2 is legacy code and I do not have the time to add new
> > features. It is just maintained as it is and bugs are fixed.
> > 
> > We have a rewrite of this in IPFire 3 already.
> 
> So, there will be more verbose output?

Yes some. It will look like this:

  http://pakfire.ipfire.org/packages/release/bash/0-4.3-11.ip3/logs/bui
ld.x86_64.1.log

AT the beginning of the log there is just a quick overview about the
package being built. Then follows a transaction summary of pakfire
which lists which packages will be installed/update/removed and after
that a progress bar what step of the transaction is currently taking
place.

Then there is a build of the bash package which is part of the build
system and not pakfire as a package manager.

Basically pakfire installs a temporary chroot environment with all the
build dependencies, compiled the package and finally destroys the whole
build environment again.

> > >     PAKFIRE UPGR: We are going to install all packages listed
> > > above.
> > >     PAKFIRE INFO: Is this okay? [y/N]
> > > 
> > > --> Shouldn't the default be Yes?
> > 
> > Why?
> 
> Cause you would normally want to install the new packages? And
> maybe  
> IPFire relies on the new versions? (I don't know how this is supposed
> to  
> work)

You are not asked if you want to install the core update. That will
always happen. This is just for the add-on packages. Of course you
would want to install them indeed.

I basically thought that "n" is the safe option here and this is
usually the default. How do other package managers do this? I would
like this to be equal for better user experience. Once you are used to
these things... you know?

> 
> 
> Lars

-Michael

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-22 22:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-22 18:16 Lars Schuhmacher
2015-12-22 22:36 ` Michael Tremer
2015-12-22 22:45   ` Larsen
2015-12-22 22:51     ` Michael Tremer [this message]
2015-12-22 23:25       ` Larsen
2015-12-23  0:35       ` R. W. Rodolico

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1450824673.2928.25.camel@ipfire.org \
    --to=michael.tremer@ipfire.org \
    --cc=development@lists.ipfire.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox