Bug 466490

Summary:	software management: improve import/export to real management
Product:	[openSUSE] openSUSE 11.1	Reporter:	macias - <bluedzins>
Component:	YaST2	Assignee:	Stefan Hundhammer <shundhammer>
Status:	RESOLVED WONTFIX	QA Contact:	Jiri Srain <jsrain>
Severity:	Enhancement
Priority:	P5 - None	CC:	dmacvicar, tgoettlicher
Version:	Final
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	x86-64
OS:	Other
Whiteboard:
Found By:	---	Services Priority:
Business Priority:		Blocker:	---
Marketing QA Status:	---	IT Deployment:	---

Description macias - 2009-01-15 17:08:15 UTC

software management: improve import/export to real management

For now this feature is so limited that in case of big lists is unusable. Such simple export/import is a great feature for repositories list, but not for the packages.

So please provide:
a) split view
imported list | current list

with all features like search/summary per each pane, so I could search in imported list, and view summary in current

b) additional mode compare
in this mode all packages from the left (which are shown) are shown on the right 

this would be useful for installing packages

c) additional mode negative compare 
in this mode all packages from the left (which are NOT shown) are shown on the right 

this would be useful for removing packages

This is basic minimum for realistic management of packages. Current scenario -- I changed the system (opensuse 10.3 -> 11.1) and also the computer + architecture (32bit->64 bit), but I would like to keep the same software. Such improvements could provide comparative view what is the stage in old system and new.

Comment 2 Stefan Hundhammer 2009-01-20 10:55:54 UTC

Frankly, I have no clue what exactly you mean. To me it looks like you have totally different expectations what this feature is all about.

The idea behind this feature was to enable users to install another machine with the same packages: Select the packages you need on one machine, export that list, transfer it to another machine, and import it there.

Yes, this is of very limited use (just another kernel that the other machine needs would wreak havoc with that concept). This is why we had dropped that feature some time ago, only to be force to reintroduce it because certain people screamed bloody murder that they wanted it back. So now it's back, and it has the same limitations that were the reason why we had dropped it.


But it was never meant as and will never be a substitute for command line package installation or for fancy list operations. That's what zypper and the "rpm" command are for.

Comment 3 macias - 2009-01-20 11:11:16 UTC

Stefan, I mean importing is way too limited.

I would like to install _almost_ the same set of packages on different machine, but the problem is it is 32-bit -> 64-bit shift. Besides, some packages are custom-made, so they cannot be installed just like that.

zypper and rpm do not provide any GUI so they are not suitable for comparisons and exclusions at all.

Or maybe I give an example -- run Komparator, I wish rpm-importer would do exactly the same for rpms as Komparator do for files.

> To me it looks like you have totally different expectations what this feature
> is all about.

Nope, I know its limitations, so this is not a bug report, but wish report -- I wish this feature would have more capabilities, like comparing the imported list with currently installed list (of packages).
And first of all -- providing split view, because looking at just one list at a time is hard to manage those imports.

Comment 4 Stefan Hundhammer 2009-01-20 11:36:28 UTC

I _know_ that it is way too limited. That's what I wrote above. Let me spell it out clearly one more time:

This feature is utterly useless. That's why we wanted to drop it. But we were forced to keep it in. But that does not make it any less useless. 

Making it useful, however, would be forbiddingly expensive, and only a very small number of users would benefit from it. If any outside contributor writes an extension to the package selector (preferably as a plug-in so it is optional), we will gladly include (but not maintain!) it. But we will not do that.