diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101009/001051.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101009/001051.html | 134 |
1 files changed, 134 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101009/001051.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101009/001051.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..4979fa2fb --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101009/001051.html @@ -0,0 +1,134 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Proposal: Updating released versions (long post) + </TITLE> + <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" > + <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Proposal%3A%20Updating%20released%20versions%20%28long%20post%29&In-Reply-To=%3Ci8orhs%248q9%241%40dough.gmane.org%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="001050.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="001052.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] Proposal: Updating released versions (long post)</H1> + <B>Marc Paré</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Proposal%3A%20Updating%20released%20versions%20%28long%20post%29&In-Reply-To=%3Ci8orhs%248q9%241%40dough.gmane.org%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Proposal: Updating released versions (long post)">marc at marcpare.com + </A><BR> + <I>Sat Oct 9 06:37:15 CEST 2010</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="001050.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal: Updating released versions (long post) +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="001052.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal: Updating released versions (long post) +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#1051">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#1051">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#1051">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#1051">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>Le 2010-10-08 23:45, andré a écrit : +><i> Frank Griffin a écrit : +</I>>><i> Marc Paré wrote: +</I>>>><i> Thanks. So this thread is to see if there were a possibility to +</I>>>><i> programme a more efficient roll-back option so that it would be more +</I>>>><i> "aware" of the previous "dependencies" needs for the previous version. +</I>>>><i> Having "double dependencies" is not so much of a problem, it is the +</I>>>><i> rollback to a previous version where the dependency confusion may +</I>>>><i> occur, and, ONLY, if an upgraded type of "dependency" thread had been +</I>>>><i> installed. (Sorry I may have used the wrong terms in the last sentence). +</I>>><i> Well, sort of. It's not an issue of efficiency, but of convenience and +</I>>><i> just making it possible to do without resorting to manual use of the rpm +</I>>><i> command. +</I>>><i> +</I>>><i> The rpm command "knows" that a new version replacing the old version +</I>>><i> supplies the same things that the old one did, so it will quietly allow +</I>>><i> the upgrade. It will also do what we need, i.e. go the other way and +</I>>><i> replace a newer version with an older one if you use the --oldpackage +</I>>><i> keyword. We just need urpmi to support its use +</I>><i> +</I>><i> One thing that could facilitate this process, if the computer has a lot +</I>><i> of free disk space, is to rename the files being removed (copying the +</I>><i> configuration files), instead of erasing them. Although they will +</I>><i> probably have to be erased eventually, since no computer has unlimited +</I>><i> disk space. Keeping them long enough that a roll-back is no longer +</I>><i> probable could be workable. +</I>><i> Then a roll-back could be done very quickly, since the files are already +</I>><i> on disk, and presumably reliably. Of course, if new data has been +</I>><i> entered, and the format has been changed, this could be problematic. +</I>><i> Note that configuration files that have been changed from the +</I>><i> installation default are often already saved. (Generally ".old" is +</I>><i> appended to the configuration file name, sometimes ".new" to the new +</I>><i> configuration file.) +</I>><i> This of course adds the maintenance task of removing the old files at +</I>><i> some point - it could be done automatically according to some criteria, +</I>><i> or the user could have to do it manually, perhaps after being prompted +</I>><i> about it. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> (This rollback capability occurs with Microsoft products. The saved +</I>><i> files are only removed manually, on user initiative, which partly +</I>><i> explains the bloated size of a Microsoft installation over time.) +</I>><i> +</I>><i> If renaming-instead-of-deleting is implemented, perhaps a "do not keep +</I>><i> old program files (useful if limited disk space)" checkbox option would +</I>><i> be useful for computers with less free disk space. +</I>><i> Of course how much disk space is usable to save old programs on a +</I>><i> computer depends on the disk space usage for other purposes over time. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> my 2 cents :) +</I>><i> +</I>><i> - André (andre999) +</I>><i> +</I>><i> +</I> +Not sure about this process. Instead of making it easier for a user, +this would now make it more difficult to do and add another layer of +knowledge for the new user. It would have to be a little more seamless +than this. + +If there were a way at setup to establish the amount of remaining disk +space at installation time, and if there were enough space to allow +rollbacks without compromising the installation, then I guess the +rollback could then be activated. The user could then be advised at this +point that this was activated. If there was not enought disk space, a +message could warn the user that software rollbacks would not be +possible for lack lack of diskspace. + +I guess then, in the MCC, if a user used the Backports and installed +backported software, the rollback amount of diskspace could also be +monitored at this level with perhaps an option to delete old programs +that are now working well in their updated form. + +I guess this would take a bit of coding. But at least the use of +Backports would make a little more sense with a rollback option in case +an updated software installation did not work out. + +Marc + +</PRE> + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="001050.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal: Updating released versions (long post) +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="001052.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal: Updating released versions (long post) +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#1051">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#1051">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#1051">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#1051">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + +<hr> +<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list</a><br> +</body></html> |