[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: monstrous failure of "yum update" on fedora 11 alpha



seth vidal wrote:
On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 13:35 -0600, Jerry Amundson wrote:
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Michal Jaegermann <michal harddata com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:16:52AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Riku Seppälä wrote:
Just curious how much memory you have? I only have 1GB and I was thinking
could that be the problem.
http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-announce/2009-February/000016.html
  it is, in fact, 1G.  so that could be an issue?  uh oh ...
I doubt it.  I have 512M in my test machine and I went through a
recent transaction of around 1400 packages without any troubles.

An old laptop which used to have 256M of memory was just awfully
slow with yum updates (it does not run rawhide but Fedora).  Now I
found a fitting module, which doubled that memory, and updates got
much faster.

I would start with

  yum update rpm\* yum\*

before going with the rest.
I would *really*, *really* like to see yum just do that automagically!
Anyone know if that's been bz'd?
I searched, but am not patient enough right now for my 900+ bug "yum"
search, nor to fine tune it.


Like I said before - we could do it - up to a point where a new rpm and
yum needs a new glibc which pulls in THE WORLD.

then you're no better off.

That's not quite true, it won't need a new glibc _that_ often. Only when the glibc ABI changes, and presumably that will only happen in rawhide.


You could also contemplate a statically-linked transition package that has few, if any, deps.




--

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:-)


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]