In my opinion, pacman could always fail with these target-target conflicts. This kind of conlicts is very rare (it doesn't make any sense to install two conflicting targets). However it can happen in an odd situation (see bug 7415), where a group is splitted across several repos. But pacman's behavior in this case is very odd anyway..
So I think it wouldn't be worse if pacman just failed, and so it would be left to the user to fix it manually, by removing the conflicting package from the targets, for example using --ignore. So this would give both a more coherent behavior, and cleaner code.
I must mention -Su here. If user has two "similar-functionality" packages, and the outdated ones didn't conflict and the upgraded ones will conflict, pacman -Su will induce a target<->target conflict. But just simply removing one of the packages from the target list usually won't help; but IIRC (that was months ago ;-) my patch first resolves target<->target conflicts, _then_ (new!)targetlist<->localdb conflicts, so removing would help here. I also like the "don't-do-anything" solution, because it is the easiest; and won't prevent me from killing pmsyncpkg_t:-P. But I still prefer "let user choose". Bye, ngaba ---------------------------------------------------- SZTE Egyetemi Könyvtár - http://www.bibl.u-szeged.hu This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/