Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 18:03 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Seth Vidal wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008, David Timms wrote:
Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 07:54 +1100, David Timms wrote:
Currently, there appears to be no defined order for install process;
in fact of a default-ish install of 1000 packages, kernel might be
around 850 to 900 into the process, openoffice around 500.
The order is determined by rpm itself, after sorting out all the install
loops, the %pre/%post requirements, etc...
Let's say that yum asked to install certain packages, or groups that
met the above criterion, as 4x separate transactions. Then rpm would
have to obey wouldn't it ?
Sure, but what does that have to do with anything?
Obviously he is looking at a problem and trying to provide ideas to
improve the situation. I assume, the fundamental idea of installing the
base dependencies first if that makes sense should be a enhancement
request to rpm instead of working around it in either Anaconda or yum.
How far down the rabbit hole do we go? Certainly if coreutils is
important, then why not shadow-utils? sed? dos2unix? Do we abolish
Requires(pre) altogether?
I guess something like, if a package that is in @base or @core, is part
of the transaction set, install it first, would work? The installer,
could work in two stages. The first stage gets you basic bootstrappable
system. This is a small number of packages + boot loader write, so a
failure due to issues like a bad burn is minimized. So even if the
subsequence stage fails (bad media, missing packages etc), you still get
something you can work with and a restart could possibly resume the
installation as well.
Currently, failures can and often does leave you with a system that
doesn't boot. Not very ideal.
Rahul
--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
