Re: [pacman-dev] [GIT] The official pacman repository branch, master, updated. v3.0.0-603-g2aa7e69

2007/11/18, Dan McGee :

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing the project "The official pacman repository".

commit 829a7b904dcb56aa17cd9279f29385dad2814793 Author: Chantry Xavier Date: Sat Nov 17 23:35:22 2007 +0100

Minor rephrasing of the question asked by -Sc.

Suggested by stonecrest on irc : 'I think "uninstalled" would be better, as it implies that the package was once installed and since removed. Otherwise a user might wonder why there are non-installed pkgs in cache'

Signed-off-by: Chantry Xavier

This also includes packages pulled with -Sw[u] but not [yet] installed. ;-) Though the majority of -Sc candidates will be uninstalled packages anyway.

commit 8f824e70bbaf9cb2b72103fe378d93e3ded8cdee Author: Chantry Xavier Date: Fri Nov 16 15:34:04 2007 +0100

Remove the IgnorePkg handling from alpm_pkg_compare_version.

And check the IgnorePkg handling is done correctly in the other places. For example, -Qu and -Su will automatically skip the ignored packages (-Su will print a warning), but -S will install ignored packages anyway, because it was asked explicitly.

Signed-off-by: Chantry Xavier

The fact that -S <pkgname> ignores IgnorePkg=<pkgname> should be documented in manpage.

commit e174865bdc154248b8b8fcf03eaa19da78e0f67b Author: Dan McGee Date: Sat Nov 17 12:56:31 2007 -0600

Don't filter package files output based on dir/file status

This caused more problems than it solved, especially with -Qlp output and files that are new to the new package.

Signed-off-by: Dan McGee

So it will be possible to find what an ugly package brought some empty dir. :-) -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)