On Sun 17 April 2011 at 17:03 +0800, Sebastian Nowicki wrote:
In addition to the names of the conflicting packages, the origin and versions will be displayed to the user.
This introduces a slight API change in the PM_TRANS_CONV_CONFLICT_PKG conversation callback. The format of the first two strings has changed from package names to strings of the format "db/name-version".
Fixes FS#12536 ---
I rewrote the patch to pre-format the package information rather than changing the API completely, as per Dan's suggestion. This still introduces a bit of an API change as the two string can no longer be used as package identifiers, e.g. in alpm_db_get_pkg().
$ sudo ./src/pacman/pacman -S qemu-kvm resolving dependencies... looking for inter-conflicts... :: extra/qemu-kvm-0.14.0-1 and local/qemu-0.14.0-1 are in conflict (qemu). Remove local/qemu-0.14.0-1? [y/N] n error: unresolvable package conflicts detected error: failed to prepare transaction (conflicting dependencies) :: qemu-kvm and qemu are in conflict
lib/libalpm/sync.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
I am totally against this. Really really totally. I personally think a formatting function for package information has strictly nothing to do in sync.c, and maybe not even in libalpm. Second, it would introduce additional parsing effort from front-ends to split against the passed string if they want to display information in a different way. And what output do you expect if a conflict arises when running pacman -U ?? What do you think is the repository from a package loaded from a file. I don't even understand why we would want to display any sort of version information. I don't see how it would help me answer yes or no to that conflict question either. That is in my mind the job of the front-end: if you really want information, it should display the list of selected packages (repository/pkgname-pkgver) that comes between the parsing of the command-line and the beginning of the transaction. For example: cb_trans_conv (from pacman) should be patched to display : :: target qemu-kvm conflicts with installed qemu. Remove qemu ? which is perfectly clear: qemu is installed and pacman wants you to remove it, "local/qemu" brings no additional information, and the version number is usually meaningless. The callback returns precisely one local package and one target package, it can be reflected in the user output. If you need to display the version number, then I don't feel like messing with libalpm's internals is the right answer. I would probably prefer have process_targname() patched (in pacman/sync.c), so that after running alpm_find_dbs_satisfier(), it prints something. If I run "pacman -S x-server", I want to see : "selecting extra/xorg-server providing x-server" (the case where alpm_find_dbs_satisfier() returns a package whose name differs from the requested name => any further references to xorg-server refer to extra/xorg-server and it's totally clear) If I run "pacman -S kernel26", I'd like to see : "selecting testing/kernel26-2.6.39-1 (over extra/kernel26-2.6.38.2-1)" (the case where the pkgname exists in multiple DBs) I think it should remove most ambiguities with least intrusive changes. However, I think modifying the callback to return pmpkg_t is not a bad idea, but then the formatting function should go in pacman. I just want to understand the first reason why we are doing this. The bug report is totally inconsistent (the title is inconsistent with the described problem and so on), and it seems we are trying to solve some imaginary problem. The best thing we can probably do is make libalpm functions return more information about their internal processing. Modifying formatting will not help that. And if people want to know why some package suddenly appears in the target list, I fear there is no solution. -- Rémy.