[arch-general] misleading pacman errors when upgrade fails
I just tried to upgrade three packages, including core/filesystem, and saw these errors: filesystem-2014.05-... 8.7 KiB 4.23M/s 00:00 [######################] 100% e2fsprogs-1.42.10-1... 691.8 KiB 1305K/s 00:01 [######################] 100% cups-filters-1.0.54... 648.6 KiB 2033K/s 00:00 [######################] 100% (3/3) checking keys in keyring [######################] 100% (3/3) checking package integrity [######################] 100% (3/3) loading package files [######################] 100% (3/3) checking for file conflicts [######################] 100% (3/3) checking available disk space [######################] 100% (1/3) upgrading cups-filters [######################] 100% (2/3) upgrading filesystem [######################] 100% warning: /etc/passwd installed as /etc/passwd.pacnew warning: /etc/group installed as /etc/group.pacnew error: extract: not overwriting dir with file /usr/local/share/man error: problem occurred while upgrading filesystem error: could not commit transaction error: failed to commit transaction (transaction aborted) Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. The failure was apparently caused by /usr/local/share/man being a real directory on my system, when the "filesystem" package wants it to be a symlink to "../man". I imagine pacman could check in advance for this sort of extraction problem for all packages before upgrading or installing any packages, which could be part of the existing "checking for file conflicts" phase. Also, the error messages about the transaction being aborted and no packages being upgraded are wrong. The upgrade of "cups-filters" was successful, and "filesystem" appears to have been upgraded too. The only upgrade that was aborted was "e2fsprogs" that pacman hadn't started. Is any of this worth reporting as bugs or enhancements? Carl
participants (1)
-
Carl Schaefer