[arch-general] Pacman v4.0.1-4 could be less verbose
Hi :) I wonder if warnings like # pacman -Syu warning: qtractor: local (0.5.3.15-2684) is newer than community (0.5.3-1) warning: rtirq: local (20111007-1) is newer than archaudio-preview (20090920-1) are useful? Once there will be more packages, it will become uncomfortable to read more important output. 2 Cents, Ralf
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Ralf Madorf <ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
I wonder if warnings like are useful? Once there will be more packages, it will become uncomfortable to read more important output.
This is nothing new, pacman 3 had these too. You should read the whole output anyway because there's no telling where some important things might be.
2012/1/25 Ralf Madorf <ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net>:
Hi :)
I wonder if warnings like
# pacman -Syu warning: qtractor: local (0.5.3.15-2684) is newer than community (0.5.3-1) warning: rtirq: local (20111007-1) is newer than archaudio-preview (20090920-1)
are useful? Once there will be more packages, it will become uncomfortable to read more important output.
2 Cents,
Ralf
This is a pretty significant warning though, that -Syu might lead to a library upgrade that breaks the apparently newer than in repo version of your application or other unwanted situations. Something is non-standard, pacman is warning you of this. Having said that, I'd like to add that cherry-picking updates is generally a bad idea. You should stick to repository updates unless you have a very good reason to cherry pick.
On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 00:02 +0100, Stefan Wilkens wrote:
2012/1/25 Ralf Madorf <ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net>:
Hi :)
I wonder if warnings like
# pacman -Syu warning: qtractor: local (0.5.3.15-2684) is newer than community (0.5.3-1) warning: rtirq: local (20111007-1) is newer than archaudio-preview (20090920-1)
are useful? Once there will be more packages, it will become uncomfortable to read more important output.
2 Cents,
Ralf
This is a pretty significant warning though, that -Syu might lead to a library upgrade that breaks the apparently newer than in repo version of your application or other unwanted situations. Something is non-standard, pacman is warning you of this.
Having said that, I'd like to add that cherry-picking updates is generally a bad idea. You should stick to repository updates unless you have a very good reason to cherry pick.
rtirq is outdated and doesn't work with the AUR's kernel-rt, it's from the archstudio repo that is optimized for Intel Core {i3,i5,i7} CPU, not important for this script, but regarding to other software I guess my Athlon dual-core shouldn't use this repo Sometimes I'm a Qtractor svn tester and at the moment I do the German translation for Qtractor from svn, so I build it from svn. For audio there could be many reasons to build current versions, a while ago I had to build ALSA to get my RME PCIe card work, I had to build Jack2, to get less MIDI jitter etc.. So for me there are very good reasons. I suspect that upgrades will break a newer software version than that from the repositories very often ;), usually older libs tend to cause issues. IMO this output doesn't make much sense. Regards, Ralf
On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 00:16 +0100, Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 00:02 +0100, Stefan Wilkens wrote:
2012/1/25 Ralf Madorf <ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net>:
Hi :)
I wonder if warnings like
# pacman -Syu warning: qtractor: local (0.5.3.15-2684) is newer than community (0.5.3-1) warning: rtirq: local (20111007-1) is newer than archaudio-preview (20090920-1)
are useful? Once there will be more packages, it will become uncomfortable to read more important output.
2 Cents,
Ralf
This is a pretty significant warning though, that -Syu might lead to a library upgrade that breaks the apparently newer than in repo version of your application or other unwanted situations. Something is non-standard, pacman is warning you of this.
Having said that, I'd like to add that cherry-picking updates is generally a bad idea. You should stick to repository updates unless you have a very good reason to cherry pick.
rtirq is outdated and doesn't work with the AUR's kernel-rt, it's from the archstudio repo that is optimized for Intel Core {i3,i5,i7} CPU, not important for this script, but regarding to other software I guess my Athlon dual-core shouldn't use this repo
Sometimes I'm a Qtractor svn tester and at the moment I do the German translation for Qtractor from svn, so I build it from svn.
For audio there could be many reasons to build current versions, a while ago I had to build ALSA to get my RME PCIe card work, I had to build Jack2, to get less MIDI jitter etc..
So for me there are very good reasons. I suspect that upgrades will ^^^^ won't
break a newer software version than that from the repositories very often ;), usually older libs tend to cause issues.
IMO this output doesn't make much sense.
Regards,
Ralf
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100 Ralf Madorf <ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
Hi :)
I wonder if warnings like
# pacman -Syu warning: qtractor: local (0.5.3.15-2684) is newer than community (0.5.3-1) warning: rtirq: local (20111007-1) is newer than archaudio-preview (20090920-1)
are useful? Once there will be more packages, it will become uncomfortable to read more important output.
2 Cents,
Ralf
Well, usually people complain that pacman doesn't show enough info... Have you tried the -q options? -- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
On Wed, 2012-01-25 at 17:09 -0600, Leonid Isaev wrote:
Well, usually people complain that pacman doesn't show enough info... Have you tried the -q options?
No I didn't. # pacman -Syup at the moment only will remove the unwanted output. Thank you, Ralf
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Ralf Madorf <ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
# pacman -Syup
at the moment only will remove the unwanted output.
Try hacking the source code: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=123911
On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 00:43 +0100, Karol Blazewicz wrote:
Try hacking the source code: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=123911
:)
On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 00:29 +0100, Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Wed, 2012-01-25 at 17:09 -0600, Leonid Isaev wrote:
Well, usually people complain that pacman doesn't show enough info... Have you tried the -q options?
No I didn't.
# pacman -Syup
at the moment only will remove the unwanted output.
Thank you,
Ralf
I was mistaken. Unfortunately the p option already suppress "there is nothing to do" too.
participants (4)
-
Karol Blazewicz
-
Leonid Isaev
-
Ralf Madorf
-
Stefan Wilkens