----- Original Message ----- > From: "Petr Spacek" <pspacek@xxxxxxxxxx> > To: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 8:44:03 AM > Subject: Re: dnf replacing yum and dnf-yum > > On 9.4.2015 20:23, Radek Holy wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > >> From: "Przemek Klosowski" <przemek.klosowski@xxxxxxxx> > >> To: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2015 5:13:49 PM > >> Subject: Re: dnf replacing yum and dnf-yum > > > >> On 04/09/2015 11:05 AM, Michal Luscon wrote: > > > >>> On 04/09/2015 05:01 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > >> > > > >>>> Using metadata from Fri Apr 3 03:24:08 2015 > >>> > >> > > > >>> ^^^ the key part of DNF output > >> > > > >> Well, OK, but when I just re-run 'dnf update' it updates firefox now: > > > >>> Using metadata from Fri Apr 3 03:24:08 2015 > >> > >>> ^^^ same timestamp as before, but different result > >> > >>> ... > >> > >>> Dependencies resolved. > >> > >>> ... > >> > >>> firefox x86_64 37.0.1-1.fc21 updates 69 M > >> > > > >> This is a definition of craziness: you do the same thing twice and expect > >> a > >> different return. In the end, I can't say that it doesn't work but I have > >> an > >> uneasy feeling that I do not understand how an essential part of my system > >> works. > > > > The reason is that even if metadata of the "updates" repository have been > > refreshed, there is probably another repository with matadata from Fri Apr > > 3 03:24:08 2015 (it has probably longer expiration period). So, yes, I > > agree that this is confusing. > > > > Do you have a better idea than printing the timestamp for each repository? > > Maybe it could print oldest + newest timestamp, possibly with repo names? > > I mean something like: > "Metadata: Oldest repo fedora-release (Fri Apr 3 03:24:08 2015, 4 days old), > newest repo fedora-updates-testing (Fri Apr 10 00:00:00 2015, 10 minutes > old)." or something like that. I doubt that it can solve every confusion related to this problem but if you, DNF users, find it sufficient, I have no problem with this improvement. My opinion is that the more text we print the less users will read it... So, if anyone find one of these ideas (or any other) useful, please, file an RFE. Thank you in advance -- Radek Holý Associate Software Engineer Software Management Team Red Hat Czech -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
