On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 00:44 -0400, Mauriat wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 12:34 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > I just did a "yum upgrade" and happened to notice this (edited highlights): > > > > Installing: > > kernel x86_64 2.6.25.10-86.fc9 updates > > 18 M > > > > [...] > > > > Removing: > > kernel x86_64 2.6.25.6-55.fc9 installed > > 70 M > > > > >From 70M down to 18M? That's a heck of a new optimizer in gcc :-) > > > > Just curious. > > Are you comparing installed size (decompressed) vs. download size > (compressed)?
I'm just reporting what yum says, but your explanation seems quite plausible. If yum is using two different criteria for reporting size, there's a bug in the way it presents information. The "natural" interpretation of these lines is that installing the new kernel package will cost me 18M of disk space, while removing the old one will recover 70M, but it looks like what it actually means is that I will recover 70M and use up an unknown amount greater than 18M. poc -- fedora-list mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
