[pacman-dev] Really pesky (and wrong!) upgrade sequence
Ignore the poppler thing for the most part, but: 1) the questions were extremely annoying (especially since you don't know how many you have to answer). Not sure if we can do anything here. If the package to be installed was constant, I'd say once you agreed to it, we could assume you agree to it everywhere. Does this hold if the package to be replaced is constant? 2) I'm definitely not removing 14 packages, nor 4106.77 MB worth either. This should be easily fixable. -Dan $ sudo ./src/pacman/pacman -Syu Password: :: Synchronizing package databases... testing is up to date core is up to date extra is up to date community-testing is up to date multilib is up to date community is up to date :: Starting full system upgrade... :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-extension-ct2n? [Y/n] y :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-extension-diagram? [Y/n] y :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-extension-hunart? [Y/n] y :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-extension-nlpsolver? [Y/n] y :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-extension-numbertext? [Y/n] y :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-extension-oooblogger? [Y/n] y :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-extension-pdfimport? [Y/n] y :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-extension-presentation-minimizer? [Y/n] y :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-extension-presenter-screen? [Y/n] y :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-extension-report-builder? [Y/n] y :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-extension-typo? [Y/n] y :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-extension-watch-window? [Y/n] y :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-extension-wiki-publisher? [Y/n] :: Replace openoffice-base with testing/libreoffice-sdk? [Y/n] warning: scorched3d: local (43.2-1) is newer than community (43.2a-1) resolving dependencies... warning: cannot resolve "poppler-glib>=0.16.3", a dependency of "evince" :: The following package cannot be upgraded due to unresolvable dependencies: evince Do you want to skip the above package for this upgrade? [y/N] y looking for inter-conflicts... Remove (14): openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 openoffice-base-3.3.0-1 Total Removed Size: 4106.77 MB Targets (17): inkscape-0.48.1-2 libreoffice-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-extension-ct2n-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-extension-diagram-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-extension-hunart-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-extension-nlpsolver-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-extension-numbertext-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-extension-oooblogger-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-extension-pdfimport-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-extension-presentation-minimizer-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-extension-presenter-screen-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-extension-report-builder-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-extension-typo-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-extension-watch-window-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-extension-wiki-publisher-3.3.2rc2-1 libreoffice-sdk-3.3.2rc2-1 texlive-bin-2010.1-7 Total Download Size: 116.22 MB Total Installed Size: 550.59 MB Proceed with installation? [Y/n] ^C Interrupt signal received
On 21/03/11 23:07, Dan McGee wrote:
Ignore the poppler thing for the most part, but: 1) the questions were extremely annoying (especially since you don't know how many you have to answer). Not sure if we can do anything here. If the package to be installed was constant, I'd say once you agreed to it, we could assume you agree to it everywhere. Does this hold if the package to be replaced is constant?
I'd say that the packaging is broken... I believe that only the main libreoffice package should replace openoffice-base, and not every split package. And libreoffice-sdk should replace openoffice-base-sdk, etc
2) I'm definitely not removing 14 packages, nor 4106.77 MB worth either. This should be easily fixable.
That is removing more than I have installed on my system! Anyway, I suppose there are genuine cases where multiple packages might replace one package, so this is still something to fix. Allan
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 21/03/11 23:07, Dan McGee wrote:
2) I'm definitely not removing 14 packages, nor 4106.77 MB worth either. This should be easily fixable.
That is removing more than I have installed on my system!
Anyway, I suppose there are genuine cases where multiple packages might replace one package, so this is still something to fix.
Pretty easy and trivial fix, I did it and it'll be in maint. -Dan
participants (2)
-
Allan McRae
-
Dan McGee