[arch-dev-public] [signoff] xz-utils and libarchive-2.7.0-2

Roman Kyrylych roman.kyrylych at gmail.com
Sun Jun 7 09:49:08 EDT 2009

On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 16:41, Dan McGee<dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre at archlinux.de> wrote:
>> Am Sonntag 31 Mai 2009 14:14:48 schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
>>> If everything is OK we can move both to core and remove lzma-utils from
>>> extra.
>> tpowa just asked me but I am not sure about it: Should cz-utils be part of the
>> base group? It'll be installed anyway because libarchive depends on it. O the
>> other hand we might want to have a base group which does not depend on
>> anything which is not a group member.
> Yes, it should. When I originally asked about adding lzma support, we
> brought up the fact that it would have to be in the base group.

Hm, I don't really see a reason for this, can you explain the reason for me?
Here's my logic:
a group should not be required to have all dependencies in a group,
reason: when installing a group pacman installs all packages as
'explicitly installed'
which makes it harder to find no-more-needed dependency in future.
Please correct me if I'm wrong about this, since I could forgot something about
pacman while being inactive for so long time.

Anyway what really bothers me is this:
# LANG=C pacman -Su
:: Starting full system upgrade...
:: Replace lzma-utils with testing/xz-utils? [Y/n] n
resolving dependencies...
looking for inter-conflicts...
:: xz-utils conflicts with lzma-utils. Remove lzma-utils? [Y/n] n
error: unresolvable package conflicts detected
error: failed to prepare transaction (conflicting dependencies)
:: xz-utils: conflicts with lzma-utils

Why upgrade process breaks here?
Is this fixed in pacman 3.3 already?

Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list