Using yumex use a lot of memory but it seems that yumex does not restitute it. You use yumex, you look for something so first in your default repos and after you try in other repos but at each time you click on refresh on the repos tab yumex does not restitute the memory. If i try this 4 or 5 times yumex saturate my memory and the only possibility is to close yumex and reopen it. Someone could confirm this and/or explain me why ? Thanks
-- Eric Tanguy | Nantes, France eric.tanguy@univ-nantes.fr Key : A4B8368F | Key Server : subkeys.pgp.net Fedora Core release 4 (Stentz) sur athlon kernel 2.6.12-1.1456_FC4
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 21:03 +0200, Eric Tanguy wrote:
Using yumex use a lot of memory but it seems that yumex does not restitute it. You use yumex, you look for something so first in your default repos and after you try in other repos but at each time you click on refresh on the repos tab yumex does not restitute the memory. If i try this 4 or 5 times yumex saturate my memory and the only possibility is to close yumex and reopen it. Someone could confirm this and/or explain me why ? Thanks
I've noticed that too.
--- "Michael A. Peters" mpeters@mac.com wrote:
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 21:03 +0200, Eric Tanguy wrote:
Using yumex use a lot of memory but it seems that
yumex does not
restitute it. You use yumex, you look for
something so first in your
default repos and after you try in other repos but
at each time you
click on refresh on the repos tab yumex does not
restitute the memory.
If i try this 4 or 5 times yumex saturate my
memory and the only
possibility is to close yumex and reopen it. Someone could confirm this and/or explain me why ? Thanks
I've noticed that too.
Although I'm still learing it and still using yumex for mostly, smartpm seems like a better package manager. It's faster and claims to resolve packages better than yum.
__________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com
Le mercredi 28 septembre 2005 à 13:41 -0700, Josh Coffman a écrit :
--- "Michael A. Peters" mpeters@mac.com wrote:
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 21:03 +0200, Eric Tanguy wrote:
Using yumex use a lot of memory but it seems that
yumex does not
restitute it. You use yumex, you look for
something so first in your
default repos and after you try in other repos but
at each time you
click on refresh on the repos tab yumex does not
restitute the memory.
If i try this 4 or 5 times yumex saturate my
memory and the only
possibility is to close yumex and reopen it. Someone could confirm this and/or explain me why ? Thanks
I've noticed that too.
Although I'm still learing it and still using yumex for mostly, smartpm seems like a better package manager. It's faster and claims to resolve packages better than yum.
Maybe it's true but yum seems to be very good and i prefer to keep the "official" fedora way. I just want yumex to be improved.
-- Eric Tanguy | Nantes, France eric.tanguy@univ-nantes.fr Key : A4B8368F | Key Server : subkeys.pgp.net Fedora Core release 4 (Stentz) sur athlon kernel 2.6.12-1.1456_FC4
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 13:41 -0700, Josh Coffman wrote:
Although I'm still learing it and still using yumex for mostly, smartpm seems like a better package manager. It's faster and claims to resolve packages better than yum.
smartrpm is very good - I like it. Last time I used it, though - it had some interface issues.
Josh Coffman wrote:
--- "Michael A. Peters" mpeters@mac.com wrote:
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 21:03 +0200, Eric Tanguy wrote:
Using yumex use a lot of memory but it seems that
yumex does not
restitute it. You use yumex, you look for
something so first in your
default repos and after you try in other repos but
at each time you
click on refresh on the repos tab yumex does not
restitute the memory.
If i try this 4 or 5 times yumex saturate my
memory and the only
possibility is to close yumex and reopen it. Someone could confirm this and/or explain me why ? Thanks
I've noticed that too.
Although I'm still learing it and still using yumex for mostly, smartpm seems like a better package manager. It's faster and claims to resolve packages better than yum.
I would try smartpm but there is no FC4 version. I guess I will stick with Yumex. BTW, is there a bug filed on the memory issue?
Am Freitag, den 30.09.2005, 10:03 -0600 schrieb Robin Laing:
I would try smartpm but there is no FC4 version.
http://www.atrpms.net/dist/fc4/smart/
But be careful: I found the medley-package-config package required by this package to be very annoying. I hat working apt and yum config files before and medley-package-config produced a lot of errors that I had to fix by hand.
Christoph
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 08:08:50PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Freitag, den 30.09.2005, 10:03 -0600 schrieb Robin Laing:
I would try smartpm but there is no FC4 version.
http://www.atrpms.net/dist/fc4/smart/
But be careful: I found the medley-package-config package required by this package to be very annoying. I hat working apt and yum config files before and medley-package-config produced a lot of errors that I had to fix by hand.
The medley-package-config is not required for smart, you can use atrpms-package-config also.
The medley-package-config is a very complete set of repos that are being offered uncensored for your own (de)activation settings. If you want to use an arbitrary set of repos of your choice install medley-pcakge-config and deactive the repos you don't need/want.
Am Samstag, den 01.10.2005, 09:15 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm:
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 08:08:50PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Freitag, den 30.09.2005, 10:03 -0600 schrieb Robin Laing:
I would try smartpm but there is no FC4 version.
http://www.atrpms.net/dist/fc4/smart/
But be careful: I found the medley-package-config package required by this package to be very annoying. I hat working apt and yum config files before and medley-package-config produced a lot of errors that I had to fix by hand.
The medley-package-config is not required for smart, you can use atrpms-package-config also.
The medley-package-config is a very complete set of repos that are being offered uncensored for your own (de)activation settings. If you want to use an arbitrary set of repos of your choice install medley-pcakge-config and deactive the repos you don't need/want.
It's not about (de)activating one or the other repo but about duplicate entries and conflicting files. Example: A fresh fedora install with medley-package-config will result in the following yum error/warning:
Repository updates-testing is listed more than once in the configuration Repository extras is listed more than once in the configuration
"extras" is already defined in fedora-extras.repo from fedora-release, it's defined again in fedoraextras.repo from medley-package-config. With atrpms-package-config "updates-testing" still has a duplicate entry, since it is already defined in fedora.repo and again in base.repo from your package.
And there are more duplicates, that are not causing error messages (for the channel has a different name) but slow down yum(ex) a lot: - "release" from base.repo is "base" in fedora.repo - "updates" in base.repo is "updates-released" fedora.repo
I remember someone on the german fedora-list complained that one of your *-package-config packages screwed up up2date. I hope now you see why I warned the OP about your medley-package-config.
IMHO all your *-package-config rpms should ether be _fully_ compatible at least to fedora-release (since it is part of a core install, maybe livna-release, too) or smart/apt from your repo should not depend on them.
Just my two eurocents
Christoph
P.S.: Nether medley-package-config nor atrpms-package-config are listed at www.atrpms.net.
Hi,
On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 03:18:11PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Samstag, den 01.10.2005, 09:15 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 08:08:50PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Freitag, den 30.09.2005, 10:03 -0600 schrieb Robin Laing:
I would try smartpm but there is no FC4 version.
http://www.atrpms.net/dist/fc4/smart/
But be careful: I found the medley-package-config package required by this package to be very annoying. I hat working apt and yum config files before and medley-package-config produced a lot of errors that I had to fix by hand.
The medley-package-config is not required for smart, you can use atrpms-package-config also.
"extras" is already defined in fedora-extras.repo from fedora-release, it's defined again in fedoraextras.repo from medley-package-config. With atrpms-package-config "updates-testing" still has a duplicate entry, since it is already defined in fedora.repo and again in base.repo from your package.
You didn't fully upgrade to ATrpms' contents, this happens on partial upgrades/installs.
Unfortunately FC changes its deployment method of depsolver config files on every release. The mostly sane config was to split the fedora-release into a proper release package and a depsolver config package, where the latter can be extended or simply replaced. But you only get this split, if you do an upgrade against ATrpms.
Now, some will see an opportunity to cry out "murderer" and "how can you touch Fedora Core packages" and so on. Whoever cares can find miriads of threads on several lists that discuss these issues, please keep this thread clean ;)
IMHO all your *-package-config rpms should ether be _fully_ compatible at least to fedora-release
They are as a set of packages (and that's how any repo should be considered IMHO), you need to make a full upgrade.
(since it is part of a core install, maybe livna-release, too) or smart/apt from your repo should not depend on them.
They don't, try rpm -qR smart/apt, there is no trace of any *-package-config. This is intended, so anyone can reuse the depsolvers with his own *-package-config (or *-release) package. All the packages require is a repo-agnostic file dependency on their master config file(s).
I don't argue that this is the perfect solution, only a good working one for using several repos with several depsolvers. There are probably better ways to do it, and if you find one, I'll gladly accept patches :)
P.S.: Nether medley-package-config nor atrpms-package-config are listed at www.atrpms.net.
Did you try google? It's the first link in
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.atrpms.net+medley-package-config+a...
or try rpm -qi on the package to see that its srpm is 3rd-party-package-config and go to
http://atrpms.net/3rd-party-package-config/
Just checked out kyum (got to install kde-bunch_of_nasty_stuff to make it work). Guys it kicks ass! It is almost that convenient as synaptic used to be before 0.51 release. I wish we had this thing for on gtk because gnome-yum is far behind yet...
on 09/28/2005 03:03 PM Eric Tanguy wrote:
Using yumex use a lot of memory but it seems that yumex does not restitute it. You use yumex, you look for something so first in your default repos and after you try in other repos but at each time you click on refresh on the repos tab yumex does not restitute the memory. If i try this 4 or 5 times yumex saturate my memory and the only possibility is to close yumex and reopen it. Someone could confirm this and/or explain me why ? Thanks
Am Samstag, den 01.10.2005, 15:54 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm:
Hi,
On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 03:18:11PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Samstag, den 01.10.2005, 09:15 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm:
[...]
The medley-package-config is not required for smart, you can use atrpms-package-config also.
"extras" is already defined in fedora-extras.repo from fedora-release, it's defined again in fedoraextras.repo from medley-package-config. With atrpms-package-config "updates-testing" still has a duplicate entry, since it is already defined in fedora.repo and again in base.repo from your package.
You didn't fully upgrade to ATrpms' contents, this happens on partial upgrades/installs.
Sorry, I didn't know that you are offering a fedora-release package, too.
Unfortunately FC changes its deployment method of depsolver config files on every release. The mostly sane config was to split the fedora-release into a proper release package and a depsolver config package, where the latter can be extended or simply replaced. But you only get this split, if you do an upgrade against ATrpms.
Although I'm not having any prbls with your packages and honor your work there are reasons not to upgrade against your (or any other) repo.
Now, some will see an opportunity to cry out "murderer" and "how can you touch Fedora Core packages" and so on. Whoever cares can find miriads of threads on several lists that discuss these issues, please keep this thread clean ;)
I know this topic has been beaten to death, so I'm not going to comment on that. Just an example what happens while playing with different config packages:
$ ls -l atrpms* insgesamt 40 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 553 21. Aug 11:13 atrpms.list $ rpm -i --replacefiles /var/cache/yum/atrpms/packages/medley-package-config-102-1.rhfc4.at.i386.rpm Warnung: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/atrpms.list created as /etc/apt/sources.list.d/atrpms.list.rpmnew Warnung: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/livna.list created as /etc/apt/sources.list.d/livna.list.rpmnew Warnung: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/nrpms.list created as /etc/apt/sources.list.d/nrpms.list.rpmnew Warnung: /etc/sysconfig/rhn/sources created as /etc/sysconfig/rhn/sources.rpmnew Warnung: /etc/yum.repos.d/freshrpms.repo created as /etc/yum.repos.d/freshrpms.repo.rpmnew Warnung: /etc/yum.repos.d/livna.repo created as /etc/yum.repos.d/livna.repo.rpmnew Warnung: /etc/yum.repos.d/nrpms.repo created as /etc/yum.repos.d/nrpms.repo.rpmnew $ ls -l atrpms* insgesamt 156 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 553 21. Aug 11:13 atrpms.list -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 553 21. Aug 11:13 atrpms.list.rpmnew $ rpm -e --nodeps medley-package-config $ sources.list.d]# ls -l atrpms* insgesamt 48 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 553 21. Aug 11:13 atrpms.list.rpmnew
As you can see my old customized atrpms file is gone, so are the others.
IMHO all your *-package-config rpms should ether be _fully_ compatible at least to fedora-release
They are as a set of packages (and that's how any repo should be considered IMHO), you need to make a full upgrade.
IMHO a repo is a source for packages but one shouldn't be forced to upgrade against any repo if one doesn't want to.
(since it is part of a core install, maybe livna-release, too) or smart/apt from your repo should not depend on them.
They don't, try rpm -qR smart/apt, there is no trace of any *-package-config.
but smart depends on files provided by *-package-config $ rpm -qf `rpm -qR smart | grep distro` medley-package-config-102-1.rhfc4.at
This is intended, so anyone can reuse the depsolvers with his own *-package-config (or *-release) package. All the packages require is a repo-agnostic file dependency on their master config file(s).
I don't argue that this is the perfect solution, only a good working one for using several repos with several depsolvers. There are probably better ways to do it, and if you find one, I'll gladly accept patches :)
My suggestion is to remove yum configuration/everything provided by fedora-release from atrpms/medley-package-config and use fedora-release from core instead of your own. But of course that's you decision.
P.S.: Nether medley-package-config nor atrpms-package-config are listed at www.atrpms.net.
Did you try google?
If there's an index page I don't see no reason for google ;-)
It's the first link in
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.atrpms.net+medley-package-config+a...
or try rpm -qi on the package to see that its srpm is 3rd-party-package-config and go to
Ok, now I got it. I didn't realize that packages are sorted by their srpms. IMHO the name 3rd-party-package-config is misleading: A package named 3rd-party-* should not include config files for core and extras, for they are not 3rd party be definition.
What's the use of an empty 3rd-party-package-config.rpm - no files inside, no requires, nothing to provide? It might be better to remove it from your repo if possible?!
Christoph
P.S.: Pls don't get me wrong: I really honor your work for the fedora community, although some of above statemenents might not sound that way.
On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 03:07:54AM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Just an example what happens while playing with different config packages:
$ ls -l atrpms* insgesamt 40 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 553 21. Aug 11:13 atrpms.list $ rpm -i --replacefiles /var/cache/yum/atrpms/packages/medley-package-config-102-1.rhfc4.at.i386.rpm Warnung: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/atrpms.list created as /etc/apt/sources.list.d/atrpms.list.rpmnew Warnung: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/livna.list created as /etc/apt/sources.list.d/livna.list.rpmnew Warnung: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/nrpms.list created as /etc/apt/sources.list.d/nrpms.list.rpmnew Warnung: /etc/sysconfig/rhn/sources created as /etc/sysconfig/rhn/sources.rpmnew Warnung: /etc/yum.repos.d/freshrpms.repo created as /etc/yum.repos.d/freshrpms.repo.rpmnew Warnung: /etc/yum.repos.d/livna.repo created as /etc/yum.repos.d/livna.repo.rpmnew Warnung: /etc/yum.repos.d/nrpms.repo created as /etc/yum.repos.d/nrpms.repo.rpmnew $ ls -l atrpms* insgesamt 156 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 553 21. Aug 11:13 atrpms.list -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 553 21. Aug 11:13 atrpms.list.rpmnew $ rpm -e --nodeps medley-package-config $ sources.list.d]# ls -l atrpms* insgesamt 48 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 553 21. Aug 11:13 atrpms.list.rpmnew
As you can see my old customized atrpms file is gone, so are the others.
Isn't that what you asked rpm to do with --replacefiles? From rpm's man page: --replacefiles Install the packages even if they replace files from other, already installed, packages.
I never use it, so I don't know what it *actually* does. I would expect it to still honour %config(noreplace) tags in the specfile, but it looks like it ignores them.
But that is not a problem/bug of the package's content then, but a bug in rpm --replacefiles, either in code or in its description on the man page.
They are as a set of packages (and that's how any repo should be considered IMHO), you need to make a full upgrade.
IMHO a repo is a source for packages but one shouldn't be forced to upgrade against any repo if one doesn't want to.
In general I agree, but what about package subsets that are intertwined like foo and foo-devel? Or more fine-grained packages, or - as in this case - cooperating packages (e.g. packages coming from a different srpm, but still depending on each other's structure).
So a repo is not just a sum of independent packages, there are various levels of dependencies (explicit package dependencies, files dependencies, implicit assumptions about other packages etc.) between subsets of the repo, and if you break them, you get a buggy situation.
This is why setting priorities and weights or temporily enabling repos is a bad thing, and why ATrpms doesn't enforce any such policy in meldey-package-config anymore. It did some ages and a day ago, but it was withdrawn due to politics (ATrpms wants to be friendly towards any repo), and the above mentioned technical issues.
(since it is part of a core install, maybe livna-release, too) or smart/apt from your repo should not depend on them.
They don't, try rpm -qR smart/apt, there is no trace of any *-package-config.
but smart depends on files provided by *-package-config $ rpm -qf `rpm -qR smart | grep distro` medley-package-config-102-1.rhfc4.at
No, smart depends on its config files, that can be provided by any other package. ATrpms is offering two packages, one for using ATrpms' mirrors for FC and ATrpms, and one for using all known repos. But you can create your own tailored package, and so can any rpm repository maintainer. The smart package itself is thus completely unaware what repo has soldered it, it just asks for its config file(s).
Ok, now I got it. I didn't realize that packages are sorted by their srpms. IMHO the name 3rd-party-package-config is misleading: A package named 3rd-party-* should not include config files for core and extras, for they are not 3rd party be definition.
Well, give me a better name :)
What's the use of an empty 3rd-party-package-config.rpm - no files inside, no requires, nothing to provide? It might be better to remove it from your repo if possible?!
Yes, the issue is here more with the buildsystem, that examines with rpm --specfile what packages should be generated, and I think 3rd-party-package-config is always returned, whether it has a %file section or not.
P.S.: Pls don't get me wrong: I really honor your work for the fedora community, although some of above statemenents might not sound that way.
Oh, no, I don't get you wrong, I like constructive critism. :)
As I said, this is not the perfect solution, and I wouldn't mind to improve it. It is a good *working* solution and it works not only for FC4, but for FC3 to FC1, RH9 to RH7.3 and RHEL4 and RHEL3 including some clones like scientific linux.
Supporting all these distros and their different config mechanisms (sometimes bundled with the depsolver, sometimes with *-release files etc., sometimes there is no depsolver at all) is difficult, and any change in deployment needs to take care not to introduce any regression.
國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar) wrote:
Actually, the FC4 version can be downloaded from the Dries Repository.
Robin Laing wrote:
I would try smartpm but there is no FC4 version. I guess I will stick with Yumex. BTW, is there a bug filed on the memory issue?
If you had seen my other post, I was downloading it as I typed it. I have not had much chance to use it yet.
On Thu, 2005-10-06 at 00:23 +0800, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Do tell me how U find it after you've tried it out. I'm sticking to yumex for the meantime.
Robin Laing wrote:
If you had seen my other post, I was downloading it as I typed it. I have not had much chance to use it yet.
I for one, can vouch for smart. Its interface, IMO, is a lot cleaner than the one for YUMEX. Its also flexable, allowing you to set priorites for different repos. It also has a functional GUI ( wink ) for setting up a wide array of repositories. I can also attempt to fix problems with conflicting packages.
Micheal
Thanks for the tip. I've installed the package and its GUI. It looks kinda neat but yet, complex in some ways. I'll need to adjust myself to it.
micheal wrote:
I for one, can vouch for smart. Its interface, IMO, is a lot cleaner
than the one for YUMEX. Its also flexable, allowing you to set priorites for different repos. It also has a functional GUI ( wink ) for setting up a wide array of repositories. I can also attempt to fix problems with conflicting packages.
Micheal
-
"國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" -
Axel Thimm -
Christoph Wickert -
Eric Tanguy -
Josh Coffman -
Michael A. Peters -
micheal -
oleksandr korneta -
Robin Laing