[arch-general] File conflict between cuda and pacparser
Hello, Arch lovers, Both community/pacparser and community/cuda contain the file /usr/share/man/man3/deprecated.3.gz, so pacman prevent me from installing both packages. How can I jump over the obstacle? Maybe it's better to establish some mechanism for preventing irreleveant packages with common files. In addition, is there a dedicated mailing list for discussions on official (not AUR) packages? Something like commenting system on the AUR website is also fine.
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Chi Hsuan Yen <yan12125@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello, Arch lovers,
Both community/pacparser and community/cuda contain the file /usr/share/man/man3/deprecated.3.gz, so pacman prevent me from installing both packages. How can I jump over the obstacle? Maybe it's better to establish some mechanism for preventing irreleveant packages with common files.
In addition, is there a dedicated mailing list for discussions on official (not AUR) packages? Something like commenting system on the AUR website is also fine.
Open a bug report.
On Tue, 2014-08-26 at 21:05 +0800, Chi Hsuan Yen wrote:
How can I jump over the obstacle?
$ sudo pacman --force -S pacparser cuda $ pacman -Q pacparser cuda pacparser 1.3.1-1 cuda 6.5.14-1
On 2014-08-26 08:55, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Tue, 2014-08-26 at 21:05 +0800, Chi Hsuan Yen wrote:
How can I jump over the obstacle?
$ sudo pacman --force -S pacparser cuda $ pacman -Q pacparser cuda pacparser 1.3.1-1 cuda 6.5.14-1
That was a horrible thing to do, and an even worse thing to recommend here.
Thanks. Already reported. [1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/41709 On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Doug Newgard <scimmia@archlinux.info> wrote:
On 2014-08-26 08:55, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Tue, 2014-08-26 at 21:05 +0800, Chi Hsuan Yen wrote:
How can I jump over the obstacle?
$ sudo pacman --force -S pacparser cuda $ pacman -Q pacparser cuda pacparser 1.3.1-1 cuda 6.5.14-1
That was a horrible thing to do, and an even worse thing to recommend here.
On Wed, 2014-08-27 at 13:01 +0800, Chi Hsuan Yen wrote:
Thanks. Already reported.
[1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/41709
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Doug Newgard <scimmia@archlinux.info> wrote:
On 2014-08-26 08:55, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Tue, 2014-08-26 at 21:05 +0800, Chi Hsuan Yen wrote:
How can I jump over the obstacle?
$ sudo pacman --force -S pacparser cuda $ pacman -Q pacparser cuda pacparser 1.3.1-1 cuda 6.5.14-1
That was a horrible thing to do, and an even worse thing to recommend here.
JFTR it solves the issue with the man page file, no lib or executable is overwritten and btw. I removed it, including a dependency from my machine. $ sudo pacman -R opencl-nvidia cuda pacparser What exactly is horrible? The OP needs the software and the conflict is just a man page. IMO it's a valid workaround, exactly what the --force option should be used.
$ sudo pacman --force -S pacparser cuda
That was a horrible thing to do, and an even worse thing to recommend here.
What exactly is horrible? The OP needs the software and the conflict is just a man page. IMO it's a valid workaround, exactly what the --force option should be used.
It's a policy to keep users from learning bad things. You should never suggest --force or a package from AUR unless you attach a big fat warning, otherwise it would mean to encourage them to do it in other (seemingly indifferent) cases, eg. updating filesystem with --force can mess things up pretty badly. -- Temlin Olivér
On 08/27/2014 02:53 PM, Temlin Olivér wrote:
It's a policy to keep users from learning bad things. You should never suggest --force or a package from AUR unless you attach a big fat warning, otherwise it would mean to encourage them to do it in other (seemingly indifferent) cases, eg. updating filesystem with --force can mess things up pretty badly.
you can always suggest to remove the file(s) in question manually, or better, move to another location, then install w/o "--force". sounds better, makes it more clear what's happening, and doesn't invite trouble in the future. -- phani.
On Wed, 2014-08-27 at 15:24 +0530, phanisvar das wrote:
On 08/27/2014 02:53 PM, Temlin Olivér wrote:
It's a policy to keep users from learning bad things. You should never suggest --force or a package from AUR unless you attach a big fat warning, otherwise it would mean to encourage them to do it in other (seemingly indifferent) cases, eg. updating filesystem with --force can mess things up pretty badly.
you can always suggest to remove the file(s) in question manually, or better, move to another location, then install w/o "--force". sounds better, makes it more clear what's happening, and doesn't invite trouble in the future.
Moving and if everything is ok removing files is what I do, if such an issue happens with AUR PKGBUILDS. I should have warned that the --force option is just a workaround that IMO is ok for this situation.
participants (6)
-
Chi Hsuan Yen
-
Doug Newgard
-
Eric Bélanger
-
phanisvar das
-
Ralf Mardorf
-
Temlin Olivér