Dan McGee wrote:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 8:14 AM, Xavier <shiningxc@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 2:53 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
I think we should just put some jury-rigged, hopefully passes both 003 and 004 code in here and really attempt to fix this on the larger scale post-3.2. Xavier, would a revert of my "useless check" patch solve the problem for now?
Nagy clearly said that part is broken and does not even do what it is supposed to do. Besides, while 003 indeed passes, the similar 005 test case does not. And finally, all the quick hacks I did like this during the 3.1 releases, "to be cleaned up for 3.2", are all still here.
The only options I can support are the following ones : 1) doing nothing. I was able to work around the xulrunner case just fine with pacman -Rd xulrunner && pacman -S xulrunner 2) nagy solution : check ownerships of all files inside the conflicting dir 3) roll back system : FS#8585
Note that all these options can be followed, in the same order (first 1, then later 2, then even later 3).
OK, this is our blocker. I plan on pushing the rest of my stuff out tonight and that will be our 3.2.0 release if possible. What do we do here? I'd like a statement of exactly what to do (or nothing at all), or a patch to implement a short-term fix.
I'm happy doing nothing but a short-term fix to get this back to at least not being a regression on 3.1 would be best. If it can pass more of the fileconflict pactests, then good but from what I understand about this bug, a complete fix is too big of a change at this time. Allan