On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
Am 25.11.2011 16:47, schrieb Dave Reisner:
Well, ideally, on -S --dbonly if there's a file conflict, the packages will also have a conflicts= (which will still be honored). Yes, this is all extremely hackish and shouldn't be used. Never the less, if you're performing an operation on the DB only, it really should be on the DB only.
Ideally, pacman would ignore file conflicts in the file system only if the files do not belong to any package. If the conflicting files belong to an installed package, it should still abort and require -f.
Taking another quick look at this old patch. Given that --dbonly is probably used by 0.1% of our users, if that, I'm inclined to just apply the original patch. Yes, you could hose your database, but if you're even using dbonly, you are in a sense doing that anyway. I feel like --dbonly is an option from years ago that has lost its original usefulness (I'm not even sure what that was, to be honest). If it is only to fake having a package installed, wouldn't it be easier to have some sort of fake provision allowance in pacman.conf or something? FakeInstalled = python-random-module-from-pip=4.2.1 cpan-module=234 -Dan