Re: Is there going to be a (FC) 4 directory tree at freshrpms?

On Sun, 2005-07-03 at 12:48 -0300, Andre Costa wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Jul 2005 11:35:51 -0400
> seth vidal <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 2005-07-03 at 11:38 -0300, Andre Costa wrote:
> > > On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:49:40 +0200
> > > Matthias Saou
> > > <thias@spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > [...]
> > > > Yeah, I understand it's a bit of a problem. But most users should
> > > > really switch to yum, as it now has all the features one expects
> > > > for simple operations (and more), and from my POV only "lacks"
> > > > really specific features compared to apt (pinning, mostly).
> > > 
> > > Besides pinning, IMHO another important feature that yum also lacks
> > > is the ability to continue downloads -- I am at this very moment
> > > redownloading all 78MB of openoffice.org-core after having
> > > downloaded more than 60% of it yesterday...
> > 
> > Unless you're using an absolutely ANCIENT version of yum - regets have
> > been enabled since back in january sometime.
> > 
> > What ver of yum are you using?
> 
> yum-2.3.2-7 for FC4. I think I figued out what's happening: yum indeed
> continues downloads, but its progress bar doesn't reflect this (i.e.
> even though it is only downloading say 33% of the whole file, progress
> bar doesn't start at 66%, and this led me to think it was not
> regetting. IMHO this is misleading, I'd rather see progress bar
> reflect file percentage, and not download percentage...
> 
> Anyway, yum rocks (now that I know it is able to reget it rocks even
> more =))
> 
> Thks, and sorry for the noise,

yah - the progress bar thing is silly but - we're incrementing the
progress bar based on what we download, not based on what we have
downloaded. It's partially silly.

-sv