Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Fedora Development (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/)
-   -   New PackageKit and gnome-packagekit in F9 soon (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/120535-new-packagekit-gnome-packagekit-f9-soon.html)

Richard Hughes 07-07-2008 05:08 PM

New PackageKit and gnome-packagekit in F9 soon
 
I've built new builds of PackageKit and gnome-packagekit and moved
them into updates-testing. The new major version is hopefully much
better from a UI perspective and hopefully much more stable but is an
API break from 0.1.x.

The builds for F9 are here:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=54830
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=54886

Please test these packages, and report any bugs on email (reply to this
thread please), rather than the admin update page. When we've got quite
a bit of testing and ironed out and regressions then I'll push to
stable.

>From a speed point of view it shouldn't be a lot quicker just yet. I've
spent most of last week profiling yum and working around different slow
paths in the API. All this work I've been doing in git master, but I'll
backport that to 0.2.x in good time as it's essentially the same as in
the 0.2.x branch.

For instance, the group list used to take 14 seconds on my machine, and
now completes in less than a tenth of a second using master. If you want
to test this new code, jump onto the packagekit mailing list and I'll
give you instructions on how to build master.

Thanks,

Richard.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

seth vidal 07-07-2008 05:15 PM

New PackageKit and gnome-packagekit in F9 soon
 
On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 18:08 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> I've built new builds of PackageKit and gnome-packagekit and moved
> them into updates-testing. The new major version is hopefully much
> better from a UI perspective and hopefully much more stable but is an
> API break from 0.1.x.
>
> The builds for F9 are here:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=54830
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=54886
>
> Please test these packages, and report any bugs on email (reply to this
> thread please), rather than the admin update page. When we've got quite
> a bit of testing and ironed out and regressions then I'll push to
> stable.
>
> >From a speed point of view it shouldn't be a lot quicker just yet. I've
> spent most of last week profiling yum and working around different slow
> paths in the API. All this work I've been doing in git master, but I'll
> backport that to 0.2.x in good time as it's essentially the same as in
> the 0.2.x branch.
>
> For instance, the group list used to take 14 seconds on my machine, and
> now completes in less than a tenth of a second using master. If you want
> to test this new code, jump onto the packagekit mailing list and I'll
> give you instructions on how to build master.

That code is not a good idea and will go bananas when we change the db
format/version. I've implemented a searchNames() method to pkgSack in
yum which will let you search very quickly for multiple package names.

directly accessing the sqlite dbs without going through yums' layers is
going to break in odd ways. In much the same way that going directly to
the rpmdb w/o accessing it via rpm's layer will break in odd ways.

yum 3.2.17 which will be out this week will have searchNames() to help
your group case.

-sv





--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

drago01 07-07-2008 05:18 PM

New PackageKit and gnome-packagekit in F9 soon
 
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 7:08 PM, Richard Hughes <hughsient@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've built new builds of PackageKit and gnome-packagekit and moved
> them into updates-testing. The new major version is hopefully much
> better from a UI perspective and hopefully much more stable but is an
> API break from 0.1.x.
>
> The builds for F9 are here:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=54830
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=54886

I have been testing them since I saw them in koji.
1) Seems to be better than 0.1.x branch UI wise

Some things that needs to be improved:
1) The "getting information" applet shouldn't show up unless there are
updates or work being done, but the "getting information" after login
/ connecting to a network is pointless.
2) I tryed to delete multple package at once but after pressing the
apply button it started to resolve deps in the background without
showing any feedback to the user for ~30 sec
(the user might think it did nothing and keep clicking on the apply button),
3) The rpm post script is noisy (some media stuff can't remember)

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

"David Nielsen" 07-07-2008 05:19 PM

New PackageKit and gnome-packagekit in F9 soon
 
2008/7/7 Richard Hughes <hughsient@gmail.com>:

I've built new builds of PackageKit and gnome-packagekit and moved

them into updates-testing. The new major version is hopefully much

better from a UI perspective and hopefully much more stable but is an

API break from 0.1.x.



The builds for F9 are here:



http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=54830

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=54886



Please test these packages, and report any bugs on email (reply to this

thread please), rather than the admin update page. When we've got quite

a bit of testing and ironed out and regressions then I'll push to

stable.



>From a speed point of view it shouldn't be a lot quicker just yet. I've

spent most of last week profiling yum and working around different slow

paths in the API. All this work I've been doing in git master, but I'll

backport that to 0.2.x in good time as it's essentially the same as in

the 0.2.x branch.



For instance, the group list used to take 14 seconds on my machine, and

now completes in less than a tenth of a second using master. If you want

to test this new code, jump onto the packagekit mailing list and I'll

give you instructions on how to build master.



Thanks,



Richard.
I've been running these for a while now and I see no stability or performance problems. So far they have survived installing/removing software and performing several system updates without issue. Excellent work Richard.



--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

"Daniel P. Berrange" 07-07-2008 05:27 PM

New PackageKit and gnome-packagekit in F9 soon
 
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 06:08:30PM +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> I've built ???new builds of PackageKit ???and gnome-packagekit and moved
> them into updates-testing. The new major version is hopefully much
> better from a UI perspective and hopefully much more stable but is an
> API break from 0.1.x.
>
> The builds for F9 are here:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=54830
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=54886
>
> Please test these packages, and report any bugs on email (reply to this
> thread please), rather than the admin update page. When we've got quite
> a bit of testing and ironed out and regressions then I'll push to
> stable.

Biggest problem is that it has broken ABI in the .so without changing
the .so version. So the automatically ELF library dependancies added
by RPM don't protect you during update.

Before upgrade:

# rpm -q PackageKit-libs
PackageKit-libs-0.1.12-13.20080522.fc9.x86_64
# rpm -q --provides PackageKit-libs | grep libpackage
libpackagekit.so.3()(64bit)

After the upgrade

# rpm -q PackageKit-libs
PackageKit-libs-0.2.3-2.fc9.x86_64
# rpm -q --provides PackageKit-libs | grep libpackage
libpackagekit.so.3()(64bit)

Same soname version, different ABI :-(

And since gnome-packagekit versioning is done on the soname:

# rpm -q --requires gnome-packagekit | grep libpackage
libpackagekit.so.3()(64bit)

You can update PackageKit-libs without updating gnome-packagekit
and get a broken install due to the ABI change:

# gpk-application
gpk-application: symbol lookup error: gpk-application: undefined symbol: pk_enum_list_new

So if you want to push this to F9 you'll need to make sure that the
new PackageKit-libs RPM, has a Conflicts: gnome-packagekit < 0.2.3-3.fc9
or re-spin the upstream release to increment the .soname version

Daniel
--
|: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Martin Sourada 07-07-2008 05:52 PM

New PackageKit and gnome-packagekit in F9 soon
 
On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 18:08 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> Please test these packages, and report any bugs on email (reply to this
> thread please), rather than the admin update page. When we've got quite
> a bit of testing and ironed out and regressions then I'll push to
> stable.
>

I've been using rawhide snapshots for a while and when I noticed these
upgrades in koji, I "downgraded" to the F9 version. So far seems stable,
no real issues noticed, only some not-so-intuitive behaviour during
installing local rpms:

* It always asks for authentication and there is no option to remember
the authentication when it discovers thath the package is not signed. Is
it intentional?

* The window with update progress closes itself after I give the needed
permissions to install and as a result I am not notified of the update
result. I can reopen the window via the notify icon though...

Hm... come to think of it, I just remembered it does not say the
installation failed if some pre/post-install scriplet failed. I noticed
it while upgrading broken intel driver package multiple times, until
finally discovering in command line (yum update), that actually some
scriplet was giving and error. Btw. the said package was fixed rather
promptly. Yum seems to be OK with failing scriplets (i.e. finishes the
update/install/remove of other packages and marks the installation as
success), so this might not be PackageKit fault.

Martin
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

seth vidal 07-07-2008 05:54 PM

New PackageKit and gnome-packagekit in F9 soon
 
On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 19:52 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 18:08 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > Please test these packages, and report any bugs on email (reply to this
> > thread please), rather than the admin update page. When we've got quite
> > a bit of testing and ironed out and regressions then I'll push to
> > stable.
> >
>
> I've been using rawhide snapshots for a while and when I noticed these
> upgrades in koji, I "downgraded" to the F9 version. So far seems stable,
> no real issues noticed, only some not-so-intuitive behaviour during
> installing local rpms:
>
> * It always asks for authentication and there is no option to remember
> the authentication when it discovers thath the package is not signed. Is
> it intentional?
>
> * The window with update progress closes itself after I give the needed
> permissions to install and as a result I am not notified of the update
> result. I can reopen the window via the notify icon though...
>
> Hm... come to think of it, I just remembered it does not say the
> installation failed if some pre/post-install scriplet failed. I noticed
> it while upgrading broken intel driver package multiple times, until
> finally discovering in command line (yum update), that actually some
> scriplet was giving and error. Btw. the said package was fixed rather
> promptly. Yum seems to be OK with failing scriplets (i.e. finishes the
> update/install/remove of other packages and marks the installation as
> success), so this might not be PackageKit fault.
>

s/yum/rpm/

some failing scriptlets are not fatal to the transaction.

-sv


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Richard Hughes 07-07-2008 10:29 PM

New PackageKit and gnome-packagekit in F9 soon
 
On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 19:52 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote:
> * It always asks for authentication and there is no option to remember
> the authentication when it discovers thath the package is not signed. Is
> it intentional?

Yup, there's a security hole (potentially) if we allow the auth to be
retained for unsigned files.

> * The window with update progress closes itself after I give the needed
> permissions to install and as a result I am not notified of the update
> result. I can reopen the window via the notify icon though...

How did you launch the update? Using the icon or using the Update
software tool?

> Yum seems to be OK with failing scriplets (i.e. finishes the
> update/install/remove of other packages and marks the installation as
> success), so this might not be PackageKit fault.

Hmm. If you can reproduce, could you run "pkcon update" in the console
please, and post the output.

Thanks,

Richard.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Richard Hughes 07-07-2008 10:30 PM

New PackageKit and gnome-packagekit in F9 soon
 
On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 18:27 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> So if you want to push this to F9 you'll need to make sure that the
> new PackageKit-libs RPM, has a Conflicts: gnome-packagekit < 0.2.3-3.fc9
> or re-spin the upstream release to increment the .soname version

Ooops, thanks for catching this. I'll respin a 0.2.4 release upstream to
address this.

Thanks.

Richard.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Richard Hughes 07-07-2008 10:30 PM

New PackageKit and gnome-packagekit in F9 soon
 
On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 19:19 +0200, David Nielsen wrote:
> I've been running these for a while now and I see no stability or
> performance problems. So far they have survived installing/removing
> software and performing several system updates without issue.
> Excellent work

Thanks, cheers for the positive response.

Richard.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:56 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.