[Yum-devel] [PATCH] report total download size
michael.favia at insitesinc.com
Mon Jan 24 16:42:16 UTC 2005
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
seth vidal wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 10:50 +0100, Gijs Hollestelle wrote:
>>While I agree with Seth that this is not really necessary: it does not
>>provide any new information, but just provides the information in a
>>better looking way. I must admit that it looks very good for this
>>particular transaction (where package names are relativly short).
It does provide new information (package sizes) but more importantly it
helps make the details that are already there a bit more legible which
is honestly becoming and issue as more things get tacked on to the end
of the package name (a bit too James Joyce for my tastes).
>>Do you have a suggestion what this should look like for a transaction
>>that has both short and some very long package name and versions, for
>>example kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.9-1.667-1.0.6629-0.lvn.1, in such a
>>way that the complete table still looks nice and that won't be too
>>hard to implement (ie does not require complex formatting libraries)?
Good question. I have a couple of idea regarding formatting for large
package names and i will slip out another email regarding my suggestions
this afternoon but im unfortunately pressed for time this morning.
>>If so I'd be willing to implement this, in order to make yum look a
>>bit prettier :-)
Id love to see it and would be willing to help.
> One other problem - packages you don't have to download still have to be
> listed for the transaction.
> Listing them as a 0M Size is just kinda silly.
Another good issue. Let me ruminate for an hour or so to attempt the
most elegant solution. Thanks for the good feedback and the open
attitude towards improving yum.
Michael Favia michael.favia at insitesinc.com
Insites Incorporated http://michael.insitesinc.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Yum-devel