What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

[James Antill]

On Sun, 2008-12-14 at 19:33 +0100, Robert Scheck wrote:
> Hello Kevin,
> 
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Robert Scheck wrote:
> > > Of course I understand, that dbus is nice and so on, but I'm not seeing
> > > how it is really useful. Again, the push happens about every 24 hours and
> > > the cache of the downloaded files by yum expires after maybe one hour, if
> > > I am not wrong here. Why do we generate such unnecessary load and traffic?
> > 
> > Because you do not know *when* the update push happens. And there are
> > third-party repos which sometimes push several updates a day.
> 
> maybe true, but do users really need to be so up-to-date? Mirrors also need
> time to synchronize, as we learned in this thread, right? I'm still lacking
> a good reason why we're checking each yum interaction for updated metadata
> as far as I can see.

 This is probably a mildly confusing math thing, much like the 6 month
update of Fedora results in an average wait of 3 months.

 By default yum sets the metadata cache timeout to 90 minutes, now if
you want to optimize for Fedora you might be tempted to change this to
"1d" so yum will only re-check it's metadata once a day. However if you
turn on your laptop at 22:00 Sunday, then you'll miss any updates from
Monday until 22:00 Monday night.
 Or more technically, from any given Fedora update you'll have to wait
_upto_ 1 day later to see them.
 This then only gets worse with mirrors.

 I've said for a long time, if you want a "zero network" yum the best
thing you can do is run yum-updatesd it metadata only mode.
 PK kind of takes over some of jobs yum-updatesd did, is not really
integrated to do this function atm.

-- 
James Antill <james at fedoraproject.org>
Fedora