Orphan package

[juergen_harms]

Mageia somewhere has an "orphan-production" factory (evidently marking non-orphans as orphans). So far, that was a secondary issue. Is this this a known problem and figures in a todo-list?

An alternative to prevent nasty remarks from reviewers might be to suppress the "... are now orphaned" packages listing until the problem has been fixed. Such a temporary suppression could also be helpful for testing: when the orphan-list comes back again, that would be a signal that this feature is ready to be tested again.

[Germ]

I've never liked the orphan "feature". I'd like to see it removed entirely.

At a minimum there should be a warning of possible system breakage instead of just "the following packages are now orphaned..."

[wobo]

This has been a nasty problem in Mandriva, it seems to continue its evil presence in Mageia. My own experiences say that the '--auto-orphans' feature works ok mostly but it can also crash/remove your whole KDE (or worse). In the forums we mostly recommend to leave this alone.

[segfault]

Let's kill this "feature" so we can save the orphans.
If one wants to detect orphan packages, then the command "rpm-find-leaves" does a much better job.

[Sfiet_Konstantin]

Sorry, but I appreciate this feature, even if I use it carefully. It can help a lot when installing packages for test and uninstalling after.

[juergen_harms]

I agree - it hung around for quite some time in Mandriva, but got solved in the end. "auto-orphan does not work" kept being said during quite some time after - for me - it worked again (was it not fixed entirely? were these remarks caused by other problems, shoved to orphan-removal because it was the "bad guy on duty"?). And I, too, like such a feature being avaible - particularly during pre-release time when the way things are packaged keeps getting modified.

This is the background for the wording I used:
1. should be fixed if possible
2. but is a problem with second priority
3. should not hang around while it does not work - I think the reviewer argument is important for the first release of Mageia.

[stormi]

Mageia somewhere has an "orphan-production" factory (evidently marking non-orphans as orphans). So far, that was a secondary issue. Is this this a known problem and figures in a todo-list?

An alternative to prevent nasty remarks from reviewers might be to suppress the "... are now orphaned" packages listing until the problem has been fixed. Such a temporary suppression could also be helpful for testing: when the orphan-list comes back again, that would be a signal that this feature is ready to be tested again.

If not showing this list of orphan packages could save users from disasters, then I think it should be done (without suppressing the --auto-orphans option to urpme, still handy for those who know it).

Maybe open an enhancement bug report on http://bugs.mageia.org ?

[boklm]

Let's kill this "feature" so we can save the orphans.
If one wants to detect orphan packages, then the command "rpm-find-leaves" does a much better job.

It is not the same thing. rpm-find-leaves will list all packages which are not required by other packages, including many useful packages. But auto-orphans only list packages which have been installed as a dependency of an other package, and are not required anymore.

[boklm]

Mageia somewhere has an "orphan-production" factory (evidently marking non-orphans as orphans). So far, that was a secondary issue. Is this this a known problem and figures in a todo-list?

What is the problem exactly ?

I often use this option and don't remember any problem recently.

[juergen_harms]

Bokim wrote:

What is the problem exactly ?
I often use this option and don't remember any problem recently.

My interpretation of "recently" is these last days: I regularly updated my Beta-1 installation and, after updating, obtain increasingly long lists of orphaned packages which I am invited to delete (123 presently). Before starting this post - I did what was suggested, result: most KDE packages (and others) gone, needed to be re-installed.

The problem is, that such obviously wrong feedback from the system is misleading and dangerous - tolerable during a testing phase, in an operational environment it does not allow straightforward users to discern between helpful actions and nonsensical actions.

From experience with Mandriva - and from the fact that in spite of the brilliant achievements of the Mageia team this problem is still present, I assume that it is painful to solve. Hence my question whether some temporary solution would be helpful.

I agree, the urpme option should be kept available. Stormi, thanks for the suggestion. I will wait until Beta-1 is out and give it a couple of days (after a fresh install, there wont be any orphans). If the problem persists, I will then file an enhancement bug.

[boklm]

Can you open a bug report with enough details on the problem so it can be be corrected ?

Useful infos are :
- list of installed packages before/after update
- list of packages that --auto-orphans wants to remove

[juergen_harms]

Yes, will do that. At present, I have not logged the list of packages that were installed before the update - from now on, I will record that list. Waiting for beta1 with the list of updates re-growing from 0 will create a situation much easier to read.

[segfault]

What is the problem exactly ?
I often use this option and don't remember any problem recently.

The problem is that this so called feature very often suggests removing KDE or other important packages. Imagine you are a new user, you don't know much about the system and you go with the default stuff. When the system suggests you to remove stuff you just do it. Then, ooops! no desktop.
Another example is when you get a kernel update. Then you get the suggestion to remove the old kernel which is never a good idea right away. You need to reboot at least once, to see if the new kernel works well and keep the old kernel as a fall back just in case things go wrong.

[juergen_harms]

Remaining slightly off-topic

This watching Mageia 1 through adolescence is a funny process: lots of very involved people participating, everybody having very pronounced views and clearcut habits. But under the bottom line, the task of the testers is clear: (a) make sure that the final release does what they want and and works accordinging to their needs, and (b) check that the features are there that allow people with other needs (normally less experienced then testers) to customise the distro to become the system they need. That both is possible at the same time, and possible without creating a mess, is one of the great things about Unix and Linux. What has been said in this thread fits into this optic.

I am only using command-line urpm functions - is urpme --auto-orphans visible to people who update via drakconf? I think urpme auto-orphans should be availabe (when it works) for command-line use. I am less sure whether removing auto-orphans is really needed in such a naive-user environment.

[Sfiet_Konstantin]

I am only using command-line urpm functions - is urpme --auto-orphans visible to people who update via drakconf? I think urpme auto-orphans should be availabe (when it works) for command-line use. I am less sure whether removing auto-orphans is really needed in such a naive-user environment.

When uninstalling packages from Rpmdrake, sometimes, a message like "xxx,yyy,zzz are now orphans packages, you should execute urpme --auto-orphans to remove them" appears. So it is not "hidden" ...

[jkerr82508]

is urpme --auto-orphans visible to people who update via drakconf? I think urpme auto-orphans should be availabe (when it works) for command-line use. I am less sure whether removing auto-orphans is really needed in such a naive-user environment.

I think when many of us say we believe that the option should be removed, we are referring to the message in rpmdrake. At least that is my opinion. It is an expert option that should not be mentioned in the GUI.

Jim

[wobo]

I think when many of us say we believe that the option should be removed, we are referring to the message in rpmdrake. At least that is my opinion. It is an expert option that should not be mentioned in the GUI.

Agreed. While users who are using the commandline to update are mostly people who can cope with the situation or are wise enough to stay away from the function, there are users of the GUI who may take this message as recommendation. Lately a user asked, "the system told me to remove some packages it calls 'orphans', how can I do this, I can't find a programm "urpme" in the menue!".

[Germ]

I think when many of us say we believe that the option should be removed, we are referring to the message in rpmdrake. At least that is my opinion. It is an expert option that should not be mentioned in the GUI.

Yes, I would be happy with that.

[juergen_harms]

Great, we all agree:
- Users of rpmdrake should not receive the message inviting them to remove orphan packages.
- The present message should remain when command-line urpmi is used.
- In case that the bug (required packages being listed as orphan packages) is still present in Beta, the message should be temporarily removed also for command-line users - or slightly modified with a warning that this list is currently buggy.

[Sfiet_Konstantin]

Great, we all agree:
- Users of rpmdrake should not receive the message inviting them to remove orphan packages.
- The present message should remain when command-line urpmi is used.
- In case that the bug (required packages being listed as orphan packages) is still present in Beta, the message should be temporarily removed also for command-line users - or slightly modified with a warning that this list is currently buggy.

Perfect, nothing to add

[boklm]

Great, we all agree:
- Users of rpmdrake should not receive the message inviting them to remove orphan packages.
- The present message should remain when command-line urpmi is used.
- In case that the bug (required packages being listed as orphan packages) is still present in Beta, the message should be temporarily removed also for command-line users - or slightly modified with a warning that this list is currently buggy.

And report the bug with enough details so it can be fixed.

[Ken-Bergen]

Another example is when you get a kernel update. Then you get the suggestion to remove the old kernel which is never a good idea right away. You need to reboot at least once, to see if the new kernel works well and keep the old kernel as a fall back just in case things go wrong.

I just tested and that is a non issue, the running kernel is not listed as orphaned and the newest kernel is not listed.
I'm not sure of kernels between the running and the latest and will test that after two more kernel updates.

Ken

[Sfiet_Konstantin]

No
The current running kernel is not listed as orphans. And neither do the latest kernel.
If you have two kernels and boot on the newest, the oldest will be shown as orphan.

[segfault]

Another example is when you get a kernel update. Then you get the suggestion to remove the old kernel which is never a good idea right away. You need to reboot at least once, to see if the new kernel works well and keep the old kernel as a fall back just in case things go wrong.

I just tested and that is a non issue, the running kernel is not listed as orphaned and the newest kernel is not listed.
I'm not sure of kernels between the running and the latest and will test that after two more kernel updates.

Ken

Ken, I was talking about the old kernel. Check my original post again.

[Ken-Bergen]

Another example is when you get a kernel update. Then you get the suggestion to remove the old kernel which is never a good idea right away. You need to reboot at least once, to see if the new kernel works well and keep the old kernel as a fall back just in case things go wrong.

I just tested and that is a non issue, the running kernel is not listed as orphaned and the newest kernel is not listed.
I'm not sure of kernels between the running and the latest and will test that after two more kernel updates.

Ken

Ken, I was talking about the old kernel. Check my original post again.

That's a carry over from Mandriva which I filed a bug report on.
The reply was that if you can boot the new kernel that's good enough, all older kernels will become orphans.
If you're not finished testing or are not satisfied with the new kernel just except the (N/y) prompt and nothing will be removed.

Code: Select all

urpme --auto-orphans

is just a tool which you can choose to use or not.
Granted the pop up in Add Remove Software could use a rewrite to warn users that it could break things.

Ken