seth vidal wrote:
On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 12:18 +0800, John Summerfield wrote:Note that I have a mirror of development and use that; it's on the wrong side of a wireless link, but has to be better than pulling off the Internet through the wireless link.Looking at my logs: [root potoroo log]# grep -H yum-3 yum.log* yum.log-20080305:Mar 05 07:41:02 Updated: yum-3.2.12-1.fc9.noarch yum.log-20080327:Mar 06 08:18:12 Updated: yum-3.2.12-3.fc9.noarch yum.log-20080327:Mar 18 21:51:37 Updated: yum-3.2.12-4.fc9.noarch yum.log-20080327:Mar 27 00:52:24 Updated: yum-3.2.13-1.fc9.noarch [root potoroo log]#I've been going through the logs and I don't see the evidence there, but then the cleanup phase isn't recorded.For measuring this kind of problem, it would be useful for yum to log Startup commandline Changes between processing phases Elapsed time and result.So, when exactly did you say it was running glacially?
I reckon in the past two weeks, my best recollection is before the 1.0 Gb update that I saw from my logs spent around 90 minutes installing stuff. I expect that upgrade brought me to beta1.
So far you've presented nothing to help us.
I know. My original question was to see from when I should see improved performance. You are asking questions I'm not ready to answer, but if you have advice on how to collect better information for the future I'm all ears.
The speed ups are all in depsolving.
Okay, the problem I saw probably still exists. How does one get useful information logged so that it retrieved after the event?
So far I've not thought of anything better than piping it through tee, but I don't know whether that prevents my seeing yum's prompt.
-- Cheers John -- spambait 1aaaaaaa coco merseine nu Z1aaaaaaa coco merseine nu -- Advice http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375 You cannot reply off-list:-)