On 02/06/2018 02:42 PM, mrxx wrote:
I tried to solve this by checking if the library was still required by any other package, only removing it if it was obsolete (assuming it was installed by an earlier version of signal-desktop or having been left from a make-only dependency), but keeping it if there were dependencies. This allowed signal-desktop to co-exist with them. (A check in the start script of signal-desktop made sure it was always started the right way.)
I soon removed this after a user complained, just printing instructions how to remove the potentially conflicting library. I also wrote an extensive post explaining the motivation to do so as I did above. I never had the intention to to "ugly" things behind the user's backs.
Yes, and it is *scary* that you thought it was a good idea to recursively run pacman like that. This sort of nonsense is one of the top contenders for why we as a community disapprove of Manjaro. It can seriously mess up your system if you modify the pacman database mid-transaction, and pacman isn't aware of the changes. That's why there is a lock to begin with... But yes, once people complained you reverted it. -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User