On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 14:25 +0100, Jiri Eischmann wrote: > But what really worries me is a much higher number of users > with broken package databases or even whole systems asking for help on > forums. When we got down to the problem we found out the user > interrupted offline updates (they took too long, or they even got stuck > and they didn't even know the system was being updated). > > The offline updates as they are done now seem to be confusing to them. > I see more and more often advices from experienced users such as "if you > want reliable updates, use yum update" which is probably not the kind of > solution we want for workstation users. > > I know we're not switching back to online updates, but we might want to > reassess how they're done now. Maybe making more obvious that the system > is being updated and the process is not yet over, or excluding packages > that really don't need offline update so that the update time is much > shorter? One problem was that the offline updates were extremely long. IIRC Richard already fixed some issues with that, and switching to Hawkey would make it even better. Another problem is that there used to be no indication at all that an update was being performed. There now is something in the top-left corner of the boot screen. Did those bad experience you mention happen before this was added? -- Mathieu -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
