Bug 1260 - Wish : Searching in rpmdrake is not ergonomic (suggestion included)
Summary: Wish : Searching in rpmdrake is not ergonomic (suggestion included)
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 1261
Alias: None
Product: Mageia
Classification: Unclassified
Component: RPM Packages (show other bugs)
Version: Cauldron
Hardware: All Linux
Priority: Normal enhancement
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Thierry Vignaud
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-05-13 16:09 CEST by José Jorge
Modified: 2011-10-13 18:41 CEST (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Source RPM: rpmdrake
CVE:
Status comment:


Attachments

Description José Jorge 2011-05-13 16:09:45 CEST
Description of problem:
When you search for a package in rpmdrake, you want the first answer to be the best answer. urpmi does that : urpmi thunderbird directly chooses the right one.

Currently, users have to search in all packages often (choosing thunderbird-fr localisation package as example).

I would be nicer to give 'graphical apps' as first result, then other results :

Search java results would be :

graphical apps:
java-1.60

other matches:
adaptx-javadoc
etc
etc
Comment 1 Ahmad Samir 2011-05-13 19:21:48 CEST
You can already set the filter to "Packages with GUI".

Assignee: bugsquad => thierry.vignaud

Comment 2 José Jorge 2011-05-13 22:59:55 CEST
That's the problem : you will get either only graphical, or a lot of alphabeticaly sorted results.

It would be nicer to get "Packages with GUI" first, then the others in the same search
Comment 3 Manuel Hiebel 2011-05-19 17:06:55 CEST
for thunderbird, fix the package mozilla-thunderbird to take the proper rpm's language would be better :)

CC: (none) => manuel

Comment 4 Ahmad Samir 2011-05-19 19:15:02 CEST
He's not talking about the thunderbird localisation packages, but about i586 vs. x86_64; urpmi from terminal would pick the x86_64 package by default, whereas rpmdrake shows both the i586 and x86_64 in the search results.
Comment 5 Marja Van Waes 2011-10-13 17:34:27 CEST
ping?

CC: (none) => marja11

Comment 6 Thierry Vignaud 2011-10-13 18:16:34 CEST
Which is comparing apples with oranges.

Urpmi will select only one package whereas rpmdrake will return all packages matching.

Urpmq or urpmf could be compared with searching within rpmdrake.
Not urpmi

As for presenting first GUI packages, why not, but the the order will not be the one other people would be waiting for (alphabetical).
If the user has choosen the GUI view, then only GUI packages are showed.
If the user has selected the full view, then he gots all the results, which is logic.
Not a bug IMHO
Comment 7 Thierry Vignaud 2011-10-13 18:17:54 CEST
@ahmad: he didn't speak at all about architectures but about GUI vs other packages.
Though we could present x86_64/noarch first, then i586 on biarch platforms
Comment 8 Manuel Hiebel 2011-10-13 18:26:38 CEST
(ahmad don't read bugs@ since some months ;) )
Comment 9 José Jorge 2011-10-13 18:34:32 CEST
(In reply to comment #7)
> @ahmad: he didn't speak at all about architectures but about GUI vs other
> packages.
> Though we could present x86_64/noarch first, then i586 on biarch platforms

Yes, I agree : instead of the filter "packages with gui", we could always show everything, but sorted cleverly :

1.packages with gui:
1.1 x86_64 and noarch alphabeticaly
1.2 i586 (other %arch) alphabeticaly


2.packages without gui:
2.1 x86_64 and noarch alphabeticaly
2.2 i586 (other %arch) alphabeticaly

This should give almost always what user want (good arch and with GUI) first, and remove the need to select gui/nogui which is slow.
Comment 10 Thierry Vignaud 2011-10-13 18:41:11 CEST
No.
Again, we search only in the packages the user selected.
If he selected "GUI packages", then we'll search only among them.
If he seleted everything, we'll search in everything
Comment 11 Thierry Vignaud 2011-10-13 18:41:54 CEST
What's remain is just presenting x86_64 packages first, which is a dup

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1261 ***

Status: NEW => RESOLVED
Resolution: (none) => DUPLICATE


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.