On Jan 9, 2008 6:22 AM, Nagy Gabor <ngaba@bibl.u-szeged.hu> wrote:
Idézés Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>:
2008/1/3, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:
On Jan 3, 2008 7:46 AM, Nagy Gabor <ngaba@bibl.u-szeged.hu> wrote:
I know, that we don't need that field, but then we should remove 'replaces' listing from -Qi. Since we have some other not needed but interesting infos in local db (packager, optdepend etc.) I vote for remove that if(!local)
On Jan 8, 2008 5:30 PM, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com> wrote: line instead.
I wondered about the same thing for a while.
I see no reason to keep it out of the local DB, it's rarely used anyway.
Dan?
Status on this? I couldn't found anything about this in git log.
I want to wait until 3.1.1 so it can get sufficient testing. Although I think the exclusion is weird, I'm not sure how our code will handle it on complicated upgrades as no one has produced a pactest yet to test such things.
We don't want to exclude it, we want to add it to localdb instead. Um...thats exactly what I said. I just said it *needs testing*.
Since %REPLACES% is not there now, it will be just an extra unused but informative(?) field like %PACKAGER%. I wanted to exclude it from -Qi listing only, if you choose not to store the %REPLACES% information in localdb (because then we always get "Replaces: None" false report, like now). So my point still stands. Do you know for a fact that having a non-empty replaces list for a local package will not affect conflict and dependency resolving? Until you have proved this, I don't feel comfortable making the change.
-Dan