On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
Nagy Gabor wrote:
Redux: /usr/lib/zomg.so is not owned by any package. Allow foobar-1.0-2 to overwrite this file? [y/N]
Optional: s/overwrite/claim ownership of/
In this case we don't need overwrite option at all, right? (This can be detected automatically. However, this detection is slow.)
I had just thought the same thing but why would it be so slow? Would the conflict checking not already find the conflict with an unowned file on the system and so this is just adding a query?
I don't think we'd want to do this automatically. What if I actually installed something via "make install" and don't want it overwritten? Or perhaps I want a chance to C-c the operation to fiddle with these overwrite files... _______________________________________________
I didn't say that I vote to keep confirmation question and then you can answer no. By the way, it can be always useful (but slow) to query fileowners. In case of fileconflict, we just get an error message "/usr/bin/foo exists in filesystem", so pacman doesn't inform us about (file)conflicting packages ("local package foo conflict with transaction package foo-ng"). Bye