On Friday 26 October 2007 07:42:09 am seth vidal wrote: > On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 14:19 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > On 26.10.2007 13:55, David Timms wrote: > > > David Boles wrote: > > >> on 10/26/2007 6:25 AM, David Timms wrote: > > >>> Peter Gordon wrote: > > >>>> On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 21:45 -0700, John Poelstra wrote: > > >>> > > >>> And it would be nice for both of them to "talk" in the same > > >>> language or better show both eg: > > >>> package download size install size > > >>> fred-1.0.1 100kB 665kB > > >>> > > >>> Along with the totals for the transaction set: > > >>> 4.678MB 13.434MB > > >> > > >> You are joking here correct? You 'expect' a compressed file > > >> to 'announce' it's installed size? > > > > > > Yeah. > > > It wouldn't need to be perfect {eg when scripts generate > > > further data during the install}. > > > What OS does that? > > > Like zipinfo. Maybe a new feature to include in rpm metadata > > > itself ? Maybe Fedora needs to be first modern one ? It wouldn't be the first. (see below) > > It's likely easier -- the rpm header contains all the needed > > info already afaik. And it's even in the data that yum > > downloads afaics; take a look at the file > > /updates/7/x86_64/repodata/primary.xml.gz on your favorite > > mirror and you'll for each package see something like this: > > > > [...] > > <size package="400311" installed="1213843" > > archive="1218576"/> [...] > > > > I suppose that's the data that is needed and it's likely in the > > primary.sqlite.bz2 (which yum prefers these days iirc) as well. > > > > David, maybe just file a bug as RFE and see what happens. > > I can tell you what'll happen :) > > The issue is where to put the data on the screen and how to keep > from confusing the user. We could definitely say 'total installed > size' in the total summary but putting installed size next to > download size for each package just eats up valuable screen > real-estate on a console. > > So if you want to file a bug, no problem, just have a suggestion > on where you want this to show up. > > -sv I came to rawhide from cooker (Mandriva) almost two years ago. Mdv's utility (urpmi) displayed disk space needed rather than d/l size. Most urpmi complaints on the cooker ML were that d/l size should be displayed, not disk space. As when updating, disk space change is negligible, but d/l size is much more important. I used 40%, eg, if urpmi announced the updates totaled 200MB, the approximate d/l would be 80MB's. On coming to Fedora, one of the things I appreciated most was that yum displayed d/l size(s)/total, not mostly useless disk space needed. Please keep it that way. -- Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list