| Weekly edition | Kernel | Security | Distributions | Search |
| Archives | Calendar | Subscribe | Write for LWN | LWN.net FAQ |
yum-updatesd
yum-updatesd
Posted Oct 12, 2006 7:55 UTC (Thu) by arjan (subscriber, #36785)Parent article: How many Fedora users are there?
Unfortunately, yum-updatesd is a broken piece of shit ;(
It runs every 100 miliseconds, waking up your cpu from it's power savings and thus costing you actual battery life. I suggest that Fedora doesn't install this thing by default until this bug is fixed (and yes it's in their bugzilla for a while now)
(Log in to post comments)
yum-updatesd
Posted Oct 12, 2006 13:25 UTC (Thu) by skvidal (subscriber, #3094) [Link]
I thought this had been established to be an issue in python, not in yum-updatesd?
yum-updatesd
Posted Oct 12, 2006 14:21 UTC (Thu) by arjan (subscriber, #36785) [Link]
it may be a python bug... but that doesn't change that it's eating battery in a default install..... bad.
yum-updatesd
Posted Oct 12, 2006 14:29 UTC (Thu) by skvidal (subscriber, #3094) [Link]
but it does change what you say about it though, I'd hope.
yum-updatesd is fairly cool jeremy and luke did some nice work on it and if it were not for the wakeup bug in python I don't think there'd be a mark against it.
-sv
yum-updatesd
Posted Oct 15, 2006 3:30 UTC (Sun) by anonymous21 (guest, #30106) [Link]
Well, I think the most annoying thing about it is that it runs on the background with zero user interaction. When the user tries to launch "Add/Remove Applications" or the system updater from the Applications menu it will work sometimes but not always; you may get a "yum is already running" kind of error dialog. Now think of the user that has no idea that there's a system service running on the background updating yum. What you get is confusion, because this important function of the OS seems to work on a random basis.(It should be possible for these GUI apps to know that it's yum-updatesd that is running and give a better warning; I'll invite you or any other Fedora user to make them this suggestion).
Frankly, this is yet another feature that Fedora/yum gets that we've already been seeing on Ubuntu/apt, and the Fedora/yum way is worse. I'm not trying to troll here, I simply don't understand why Red Hat went with yum instead of APT or smart, both much faster and complete. Does anyone know?
fedora using yum instead of apt
Posted Oct 15, 2006 6:48 UTC (Sun) by scottt (subscriber, #5028) [Link]
My guess would be multilib (lib64) support and a good relation with upstream.
yum-updatesd
Posted Oct 15, 2006 15:20 UTC (Sun) by skvidal (subscriber, #3094) [Link]
You're not trying to troll? You posted as anonymous and you're not trying to troll?
The bug you're describing above was in FC6T2 and maybe remaining in T3. It has been fixed in the release version.
Also - when have you last used yum? I think you'll find 3.0 to be a lot faster than anything that came before it.
But you're not trying to Troll, of course not.
</sarcasm>
-sv
yum-updatesd
Posted Oct 15, 2006 17:42 UTC (Sun) by anonymous21 (guest, #30106) [Link]
The last time I used yum was in the "fc6-pre" release, in which the bug I described was still present.
yum-updatesd
Posted Apr 19, 2007 15:44 UTC (Thu) by jqp (guest, #44777) [Link]
Rather than trying to respin the entire comment as a "troll", try addressing the problem. Sarcasm doesn't really help any.
FC6 with all of the latest updates *still* has the problem as originally described. Be it a python bug or not, the fact of the matter is that yum-updatesd is _the_ process that is tickling that bug.
Additionally, the problem with "Yum already running" is definitely true. I bumped in to it right away when I went to update several of the systems. It complained that yum was already running.. after some investigation, I realized that yum-updatesd was running, and, although no other yum process was running, it was still giving a "Yum already running" error.
After killing off yum-updatesd, I was able to run "yum -y update" without any incident.
yum-updatesd
Posted May 24, 2007 3:27 UTC (Thu) by slamb (guest, #1070) [Link]
CentOS 5 (based on RHEL5, based on Fedora Core 6) has the problem also. Disappointing.