Installed on date not displayed
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
software-center (Ubuntu) |
Triaged
|
Low
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
Steps to reproduce:
1. Open software center
2. Go to the details screen of an installed application and check the statusbar stating the installation status
3. Click back
4. Click forward, or visit any other installed application
What happens:
2. Only "Installed" is displayed, not "Installed on DATE"
4. "Installed on DATE" is displayed
Expected:
The result should be "Installed on DATE" shown in both steps
Note:
The date is not displayed only for the first opened application, for all subsequent installed applications the date is displayed, so this bug can be reproduced only one time per software center session, to reproduce it again, you will have to close and restart software-center.
ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 11.10
Package: software-center 4.1.22
ProcVersionSign
Uname: Linux 3.0.0-11-
ApportVersion: 1.22.1-0ubuntu2
Architecture: i386
Date: Thu Sep 15 23:10:42 2011
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 11.10 "Oneiric Ocelot" - Alpha i386 (20110727)
PackageArchitec
ProcEnviron:
PATH=(custom, no user)
LANG=en_US.UTF-8
SHELL=/bin/bash
SourcePackage: software-center
UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to oneiric on 2011-09-15 (0 days ago)
Changed in software-center (Ubuntu): | |
status: | New → Confirmed |
Changed in software-center (Ubuntu): | |
status: | Confirmed → In Progress |
assignee: | nobody → Robert Roth (evfool) |
tags: | removed: apport-bug i386 oneiric running-unity |
This seems to be caused by the lazy loading behavior of the package history: when the get_installed_date is first called,the apt history is not initialized yet, thus it will return None (and we don't display that), and adds an idle callback to rescan the history, which will properly initialize it, that is why subsequent calls work as expected.
I'm not sure what we should do here, as it's either performance (lazy loading helps) or consistency (on first load, we won't have the installed date), I guess this needs a decision to be taken, unless someone finds a third alternative.