On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 01:19:44PM +0100, Nagy Gabor wrote:

...

3. commit 55a7455135e2d8f2e118928f634dc7976ab6c8b4 and asymmetric search-for-satisfier caused a strange situation: # pacman -S foo --ignore foo-dependency "install foo-dependency anyway?" is asked twice, if this foo-dependency is a literal satisfier, because in the search-for-provisions we use alpm_depcmp, which finds literals again...

Uh, I thought I couldn't reproduce this, because I was answering the default question (yes). Now I see, but I don't consider this to be a big problem. Why would you answer no to the question anyway? When you do, pacman will just fail.

Well, this is not a big problem -- just ugly. Why would I answer no? Because I don't like foo-dependency at all, that's why I put foo-dependency into IgnorePkg ;-) And I hope that pacman will find an other (provision) satisfier. So pacman won't fail by default (this was the goal of 55a7455135e2d8f2e118928f634dc7976ab6c8b4). As I see, I must commit a trivial patch for this... Bye ---------------------------------------------------- SZTE Egyetemi Könyvtár - http://www.bibl.u-szeged.hu This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/