On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 1:22 AM, Aleix Pol <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wednesday, November 11, 2015 07:08:39 PM Matthias Klumpp wrote: >>> 2015-11-11 7:09 GMT+01:00 Scott Kitterman <[email protected]>: >>> > [...] >>> > My personal experience with PackageKit + Apper was very poor. It was my >>> > experience that PackageKit's apt integration was just a thin graft on top >>> > of (or under depending on your perspective) something designed to work >>> > with RPM and really didn't work at all well in Kubuntu. >>> >>> When did you try that last? Since on Debian we never had such issues, >>> since the switch to the aptcc backend, which performs much better than >>> the old Python-based apt backend. >>> PK itself is in no way RPM specific, in fact it even has >>> Debian-specific facilities built in (e.g. for Debconf support). >>> It is, however, relatively basic and does not support some advanced >>> features (like setting packages on hold) - but that's something one >>> doesn't do in a software center anyway. >> >> It was several years ago (probably 3 - 5, but I don't recall). I don't have >> any more recent experience, so I'm sure it could have changed. >> >>> > I don't know if it was because >>> > of the Apper design or inherent in PackageKit, but it had it's own package >>> > cache that seemed to be frequently out of sync with apt (note: aptitude >>> > does/did something similar and associated problems have caused me to stay >>> > far away from it as well). >>> >>> Where did you get that idea from? PK, apt and aptcc never had their >>> own package cache, and always accessed the apt cache directly. There >>> is/was a cache for .desktop-file-->package associations, but that one >>> was only used to display a "launch application" dialog after >>> installing (and it didn't matter much if that cache was out of sync). >> >> Back when I tried it, I regularly saw cases where there were updates that apt >> was aware of that apper was not. Also, I recall that the only way to >> determine if additional packages would need to be installed along with a >> package upgrade was to do a dry run upgrade internally and then if it failed, >> additional packages were needed. >> >> As mentioned above, this was a long time ago and I have not kept up to see if >> things have changed. >> >>> > In my limited free time I've been working on making QApt + Muon work >>> > better in Debian and if there's a newer thing in that direction to test, >>> > I'd be glad to test it on Debian. >>> >>> Please do, but please also use a recent version of PK and QPK - the >>> version in Ubuntu has been outdated for years, which will be fixed >>> this cycle as I was told. >> >> I'm using whatever is in Debian. >> >> Scott K >> >> -- >> kubuntu-devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel > > IMHO Apper usage is completely unrelated to this transition. In fact, > I doubt that Apper is up to speed yet. The port to Qt5 is very recent > and it will lack features that an apt-centered alternative can offer > (such as Muon or Synaptic). > > Aleix
Since this has been quite silent for the last days, I decided to move on and port the QApt backend to AppStream. It's in a qapt+appstream branch: http://commits.kde.org/discover/534290759ae964cd7b47d325019f08a5b507e29e Problem: AppStream database in willy is broken and lacks quite some information (and so does willy+1, but to a lesser extent). This means that if I merge this patch in master (which I want to do), Plasma/5.5 Discover on Kubuntu Willy won't work. Could somebody please look into updating/fixing the AppStream in willy? For reference: using this ppa solves all of the problems: add-apt-repository ppa:ximion/packagekit Aleix -- kubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
