Orphan package

[juergen_harms]

Hi Ken - nice to see you here

In Mandriva, there has been much cscussioni on the question of kernel packages. My memory says that there was some kind of consensus: kernels should be automatically proposed for updating like any other package, old kernels should not be automatically un-installed, old kernels should not appear as an orphan, doing urpme <kernel> should also some general clean-up - for instance remove items relative to that kernel from the the boot menu.

I am sure that Mageia behaves correctly with respect to all these points - except the orphan-list. I just verified: in my long list of auto-orphans that I am proposed to eliminate, there are 3 old, but still installed, kernel packages. It is evident: it is imperative that, after installing a new kernel, at least the most recent kernel must remain installed - essential for fallback in case of serious problems. Another aspect of the present problems with the list of orphans

Apropos talking about installing kernel updates: I think to remember that I was struck when in alpha-1 (?) I downloaded and installed a new kernel without getting the corresponding kernel-<something>-latest. At that time I had other worries and forgot the issue. Has this been remarked by somebody else? - but I am far from sure that the problem was not my handling things

[maat]

Just for a teste (sorry guys)

[Ken-Bergen]

Hi Ken - nice to see you here

In Mandriva, there has been much cscussioni on the question of kernel packages. My memory says that there was some kind of consensus: kernels should be automatically proposed for updating like any other package, old kernels should not be automatically un-installed, old kernels should not appear as an orphan, doing urpme <kernel> should also some general clean-up - for instance remove items relative to that kernel from the the boot menu.

I am sure that Mageia behaves correctly with respect to all these points - except the orphan-list. I just verified: in my long list of auto-orphans that I am proposed to eliminate, there are 3 old, but still installed, kernel packages. It is evident: it is imperative that, after installing a new kernel, at least the most recent kernel must remain installed - essential for fallback in case of serious problems. Another aspect of the present problems with the list of orphans

When Mandriva added kernels to auto-orphans the stated intent was that the next older kernel would never become an orphan, IE you would always be left with an older kernel to test against the newest in case of problems.

As the developers are up to their eye balls in work preparing for the first release I'll wait to file a bug report/enhancement request.

Ken

BTW: I maybe in your neck of the woods this summer on a motorcycle trip. I'll PM you if/when it happens and perhaps we can meet for lunch or coffee.

[juergen_harms]

Would be great to add personal contact to the "paper-encounters", I would enjoy that very much (maybe not evident to plan since I am passing quite some time in my old home in Austria). Yes, lets arrange that via pm.

[juergen_harms]

Before doing a fresh install from the Beta-1 dvd, I did some more checking:

- The problem only exists on my laptop (where I had installed an alpha-1 dvd + regular updates): I manually did "urpme <packagename>" on packages that urpme --auto-orphans claims to be orphans. Already the second one I tried (strigi-devel-0.7.2-4.mga1.i586) wanted to trigger removing 7 other packages, for instance kdebase4-workspace-4.6.2-1.mga1.i586.

- On my desktop (installed from an alpha-2 dvd + regular updates) the problem does not exist, all suggested packages are real orphans and can be deleted without negative consequences (except that all old kernels go away).

That looks as if the problem might already have been resolved and is just hanging around on the system that I had created very early in the game. Is there something at the level of urpmi that corresponds to rpm --rebuilddb?

So, personally I assume that auto-orphaning works - but will keep a close watch. Presently, there is no evidence that would call for submitting a bug (maybe the backup-kernel problem, but I agree with Ken: low priority, sometime later).

[dglent]

The --auto-orphans is a very usefull feature but it has to be excecuted from advanced users or when a user is able to understand what kind of packags will be removed (eg the whole KDE)

[juergen_harms]

I do not understand what you say - is this just a general health warning? nobody in this thread is at the level of risking to accidentally remove his entire KDE -and this thread is precisely about how the more naive user can be better protected.

But, we should assume that Mageia delivers a perfectly working urpm infrastructure: the risk for a naive user is utterly different if urpme works correctly or if it does funny things. At present it looks like working nearly perfectly - verifying this assumption is the purpose of the pre-release period.

[boklm]

So, personally I assume that auto-orphaning works - but will keep a close watch. Presently, there is no evidence that would call for submitting a bug (maybe the backup-kernel problem, but I agree with Ken: low priority, sometime later).

Without a precise list of installed packages and packages it wants to remove, it's impossible to tell.

[juergen_harms]

Without a precise list of installed packages and packages it wants to remove, it's impossible to tell.

Not quite:

1. urpme --auto-orphans
2. quit as soon as the list is displayed and you are asked to confirm
3. for each item of the list: urpme <item>
4. verify the dependencies that would also be removed

(a) if "reasonable" accept, =>3
(b) if items that I know (or guess) are needed (are not an orphan) => quit

For my desktop, the list was about 20 items long, all real orphans
For my laptop, > 200 item, abandon: already the second item would have deleted a certainly required KDE package

I agree, not an operation I like to do every day - but OK in decission of whether more work is needed (saving lists of packages, submitting a bug)

[boklm]

Some people complain that --auto-orphans wants to remove KDE and other packages. But so far no one has given a list of which packages it wants to remove, and which packages are installed on the system.
If you don't give this list, it's impossible to check if there is a real problem, and fix it if needed.

[wobo]

I have a Alpha2 on my netbook. So, to report I will
- do a 'rpm -qa > alpha2_install.lst' before the upgrade, attach it to the bug report
- then use the i586-DVD to do an upgrade,
- add the list of "orphans" as orphan.lst to the bug report (if there are any orphans).

Will this qualify?

[boklm]

I have a Alpha2 on my netbook. So, to report I will
- do a 'rpm -qa > alpha2_install.lst' before the upgrade, attach it to the bug report
- then use the i586-DVD to do an upgrade,
- add the list of "orphans" as orphan.lst to the bug report (if there are any orphans).

Will this qualify?

Yes. With "rpm -qa" after the upgrade also. Thanks.

[wobo]

Ok, result of this individual test was: I can't file a bug report because I have nothing "buggy" to report.

!. After upgrade no recommendation about orphans popped up.
2. When I punched in 'urpme --auto-orphans' I got a list of 10 packages which are really obsolete / orphans. Example: kernel-desktop-2.6.37.4-1mga-1-1.mga1 is obsolete because there are 2 newer kernels installed and listed in grub/menue.lst.

I can post the lists (rpm before, rpm after, orphans) here but it does not show a relevant result in this context.