[packagekit] Feature request
rnorwood at redhat.com
Tue Feb 26 06:31:00 PST 2008
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:23:25 +0100
Tim Lauridsen <tim.lauridsen at googlemail.com> wrote:
> David Zeuthen wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 19:49 -0300, Evandro Gardenali wrote:
> >> But packagekit doesn't allow me to skip/ignore/remove a package
> >> from update list, so I would end up needing to update one by one.
> >> I couldn't find a workaround for this. so what Im asking is an
> >> "ignore" button (or other better name) that I can skip a package
> >> when its not updating, so I can have all the other updates working
> >> fine. I know that in the ideal world we would'nt have this kind of
> >> problem, but today we have :(
> > Check the mailing list archives. I've pointed out several times
> > that the absence of such a feature is a deal-breaker.
> > David
> > _______________________________________________
> > PackageKit mailing list
> > PackageKit at lists.freedesktop.org
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/packagekit
> Proposal to make PackageKit handle a group of selected updates.
> Today Package can only do:
> Apply all available updates.
> Apply a single update.
> As David and other has said, it sucks big time in the real world.
> calling update-package for each package suck from a performance point
> of view.
> How do we fix it.
> * Update the existing update-system to take a list of packageid for
> packages to update. (id1,id2,id3,.... (idx = name;version;arch;data )
> * create a new update-package-list (find at better name if you like),
> so we break the existing API, doing the same as above. but make it
> possible for the frontend to know if this one is implemented or
> not. It it is implemented then it could be used in all cases (single
> update, list of updates, all updates). Something like this could be
> done for install and remove too.
Either one works from me, but I'd probably do the update-package-list
(update-package-set?) one - because the yum backend implements
update-system with "txmbr = self.yumbase.update()", and doesn't fiddle
with a list of packages at all.
Last time we discussed this, there were various ideas about installing
the updates that 'should work' rather than making the user pick.
However, since no one has done this (yet), I agree that we should
probably take the expedient option of slapping checkboxes on the UI and
making the user do the work. At the very least, the 'smart' way will
almost certainly end up being backend-specific, so backends without the
smart way will want the checkboxes anyway.
Red Hat, Inc.
"The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone."
-Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching
More information about the PackageKit