Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 241937
Feature request: display dependency chain in anaconda
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:12:05 EST
Description of problem:
Anaconda is unable to display dependencies when installing Fedora with custom
checked or unchecked packages. This would be very helpful. I would like to see
something like the Mandriva installer displays what packages are needed/erased
in case of checking/unchecking packages at the installation.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Anacondo (no specific version)
Steps to Reproduce:
1. install a custom Fedora with anaconda
unchecked packages appear because of dependencies
when unchecking packages at the installation display a message of what packages
will be affected to be erased in this case
I believe the installer of Mandriva Linux shows messages of what packages will
be erased when removing a package from the standard installation. Something
like this would be great.
Even a simple (flat) list would suffice, yes this feature would be really nice
Computing this on the fly (which is required, given the fact that you can add
repos including updates, etc) is extremely expensive and would introduce a lot
of lag. Not to mention it's terrible UI design.
Ok, I'm really shocked to see WONT_FIX for a small feature request this soon,
but I cannot say it was not expected (I guess that's the general attitude here).
However I do not believe that the above reasons are enough to justify that
First of all, even if the option would be "slow", you could always make
it "optional" (i.e: shown only when requested by clicking a button).
Additionally, YUM already needs to build this information, anyway. (It will
install those dependencies, right?) I know, because command line YUM already
does that (e.g: Installing 10 new packages [y/N]: ). Pirut that that too. It
shall not be that difficult to display a list of strings on the screen
organized as a tree via GTK+ (yet I'm no GTK+ programmer)
Finally, several other distributions already does that. So we know it can be
Please reopen the bug as LOW / CONFIRMED or similar, so that someone with
enough time could implemented it.