PackageKit and gnome-packagekit test packages

[Richard Hughes]

On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 12:24 -0400, Zack Cerza wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 14:49 +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-03-19 at 11:15 -0400, Zack Cerza wrote:
> > > I'm excited about the changelog feature. I'm getting the following
> > > traceback, though, when gpk-u-v2 is chewing on metadata:
> > 
> > I've fixed this in git master -- can you try the packages here please:
> > http://www.packagekit.org/packages/
> > 
> > Thanks.
> > 
> > Richard.
> 
> Ah, I just noticed your reply and installed newer packages:
> gnome-packagekit-0.4.6-0.2.20090319git.fc11.i586
> 
> The changelog feature is indeed awesome. The formatting could use some
> tweaking, though. Here's a sample, from libXv-1.0.4-2.fc11:
> """
> 
> List of changes:
> 2009-2-25 Fedora Release Engineering <rel-eng at lists.fedoraproject.org> -
> 1.0.4-2
> • Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora11Mass_Rebuild
> """
> 
> The blank line should be between "List of changes:" and the actual list.
> Looks awkward the way it is now.

Could you file a rh bug please, trivial fix.

> Also, it'd be sweet if URIs could be linkified.

Trickier, but not impossible. File a bug and I'll make it so. Note, that
the URLs that people put into Bohdi are "linkified", we'll just have to
do a bit of tweaking for the ChangeLog text. Might take a bit of time.

> Another thing I noticed is that when I start gpk-update-viewer2, the UI
> blocks for around 30 seconds as it struggles to show all 967 available
> updates.

Yikes.

> That's not too terribly surprising, considering I have
> accessibility turned on. Then again, yumBackend.py seems to be chewing a
> lot of CPU cycles:
> 
>   398 root      30  10 45604  33m 6340 R 87.8  2.2   1:06.30
> yumBackend.py      
> 
> Maybe it's just my fault for putting off updating so many things. Either
> way, I love the changelog feature!

Well, we probably need to optimise the python; I'm no python legend and
it's not been optimised at all yet. Offers of help gleefully received,
but thanks indeed for the feedback!

Richard.