http://qa.mandrakesoft.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2594


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED




------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2003-03-09 23:43 -------
I hadn't tried this for awhile, but it appears to be fixed in the latest cooker.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://qa.mandrakesoft.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


------- Reminder: -------
assigned_to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
status: RESOLVED
creation_date: 
description: 
I'm not sure if this is a bug, but it is definitely not what I expected...

I thought I would test "upgrade", which I've never used before, by upgrading an
older cooker system to a newer one.  The target system was a cooker from about a
week ago, and the CDs were from yesterday.  All seemed to go normally until I
got a dialog message about "looking for packages to upgrade", after which I got
the skeleton of the package install progress bar, except that there was no
package name, no time estimate, and no number of packages.  After a few seconds,
the display switched to "post-install processing", and then displayed the
Summary screen.

I would swear that no packages were installed, in spite of the fact that the
system being upgraded had every install category checked initially, and I know
for a fact that there was a kernel upgrade to cooker in the interim.  Quite a
bit of time was spent "looking for packages to upgrade and rebuilding the rpm
database", but there was no real disk activity to speak of.

Is upgrade only supposed to be version to version, or should this upgrade
attempt have refreshed all of the cooker packages which had changed between the
initial install and when I burned the CDs I used ?

BTW, I also tried this on a second system which was only a few days older than
the CDs, with the same result.

Reply via email to