After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 58177 - GnoRPM causes carpal tunnel syndrome by popping every message as a dialog
GnoRPM causes carpal tunnel syndrome by popping every message as a dialog
Status: RESOLVED OBSOLETE
Product: gnorpm
Classification: Deprecated
Component: general
0.96
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Alan
Alan
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2001-07-27 15:56 UTC by Alexander Larsson
Modified: 2006-10-20 07:51 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Alexander Larsson 2001-07-27 15:56:05 UTC
Note: This bug was moved here from the redhat bugzilla at:
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43860

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9)
Gecko/20010505

Description of problem:
When there are errors or exceptions when, for example, installing or
uninstalling a component, gnorpm pops up a separate dialog for every
problem.  This is ridiculous.  Instead, it should open a scrolling window
where all bugs can be written and where the user does not have to keep
hitting okay to get the process finished.  This problem has been in every
release of gnorpm so far, but it should be gone by now.

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. pick a component to uninstall that has a collection of documentation
which is installed with it (the docs should have at least a few files to
see how annoying this bug is).
2. remove all the documentation for the component with 'rm'.  don't use
gnorpm at this point, just whack the files.
3. uninstall the component with gnorpm.
	

Actual Results:  you will be required to hit okay on an error dialog for
every missing file.  this will happen for every single error seen by
gnorpm, including other errors besides missing files.

Expected Results:  the list of errors should be presented as a single
entity rather than as a zillion dialogs that each disappear after okay is
hit.  this allows one to (1) not break his wrist, and (2) see the whole
history of the problems in one view.

Additional info:



------- Additional comments from alexl@redhat.com 2001-06-07 16:05:31 -------

Seems like a reasonable suggestion.

Thanks for the request.



------- Additional comments from fred@gruntose.com 2001-07-13 16:09:13 -------

sorry about the tone of the original bug report...
  anyway, i wanted to explain that multiple dialog pops could happen in a
number of ways...  some are obvious, while others probably won't happen too
often.

1) if there are files remaining when a package upgrade expects them to be
gone, one gets a complaint per file or directory.

2) in packages gotten off the net, sometimes the user is left as the
creator's user id.  then one gets a complaint about the user not existing
for every item in the package.

3) my recent install was troubled by very low disk space.  in addition to
whacking numerous packages with gnorpm, i also did a bad thing by deleting
a few whole hierarchies of man pages and stuff.  this caused hundreds of
the dialogs.
 i know that's bad, but i was desperate to finish the install and provide
enough disk space for it to complete, plus this is a very slow system which
is painful to delete multiple packages from using gnorpm.

so these are a few of the ways i've seen many dialogs appear.  hope this
makes it seem slightly more useful to do the bug window suggestion...  i
know i would appreciate it a great deal, but i think others might also.
thanks...  -fred
Comment 1 Fred T. Hamster 2006-10-19 23:26:31 UTC
    i found this bug report again recently.  is gnorpm still used in redhat or other distributions?  if so, i guess the bug report still applies, but i am not seeing it installed in suse (which is currently my main distribution).
    i'm okay with marking the bug as closed if gnorpm is obsoleted.
Comment 2 Alexander Larsson 2006-10-20 07:51:07 UTC
Yeah, its obsolete now.