Re: Comments regarding the upgrade process

["R. W. Rodolico" <rodo@dailydata.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3024 bytes --]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Other package managers (Debian for one, but there are others I can't
think of right now), have Yes set as the default EXCEPT when bringing in
packages which require updates to other packages, ie if package A has a
dependency on package B in the new version, but not the previous, then
you must explicitly tell it to install package A.

However, if package A has a pre-existing dependency on package B, then
both A and B are defaulted to being updated.

However, my two cents are for minor things like this, forget it and work
on on IPFire 3. We can live with annoyances in 2 if it ends up with more
time being spent on 3.

Rod

On 12/22/2015 04:51 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> 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
> 

- -- 
Rod Rodolico
Daily Data, Inc.
POB 140465
Dallas TX 75214-0465
214.827.2170
http://www.dailydata.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlZ57FwACgkQuVY3UpYMlTS9uQCeOjvUk7yaEwUj3A8yzetbvoo+
Pr0An2JaRaiEGlA/B0Btroy2x9gYkw3H
=9b1c
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----