-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 09/28/2014 07:04 AM, Benjamin A. Shelton wrote:
On 09/27/2014 02:13 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Sat, 2014-09-27 at 10:02 +0200, Florian Pelz wrote:
Same here. With only NoExtract, I linked /bin/sh to dash, reinstalled bash, and /bin/sh was gone. With both NoExtract and NoUpgrade, I did the same and /bin/sh was still a link to dash.
My bad, until now I'm using NoExtract for files I don't want to have, I wasn't aware that a file or link we want to have gets lost.
Okay, so I wasn't *completely* losing my mind (what little of it there is!).
Here's what I think is happening (probably wrong, but this is what I've deduced from further reading and some strace fun):
Since (re)installing over an existing package first removes its constituent files, NoExtract alone results in the reinstallation process removing bash (and the /usr/bin/sh link). But, since the file is specified as NoExtract, the link/file isn't recreated during package extraction (it's skipped). NoUpgrade, on the other hand, prevents the file from being removed (reinstallation must therefore be considered as an "upgrade" for this purpose) but if it's not also specified by NoExtract, it's immediately overwritten by the new copy.
So, if my understanding is correct, this would explain why both options must be used in order to keep something relatively unscathed. NoUpgrade prevents its removal (or more accurately it "prevents its upgrade"); NoExtract prevents it from being overwritten.
Disclaimer: I haven't looked at the pacman sources yet. This is exclusively from observation and what my (admittedly very limited) understanding of pacman provides.
That makes sense, even if it is not what I would have expected pacman to do judging from the description in man pacman.conf.