[arch-general] Why irrelevant updates?

Marshall Neill ramien43 at windstream.net
Tue May 12 22:52:44 UTC 2015

Could it be it was installed during installation.  I have found reiser, 
btrfs and journal file programs of which I only use ext4.

On 05/12/2015 05:45 PM, Francis Gerund wrote:
> Sometimes pacman presents updates that just don't seem to apply to my
> system.
> Just one example: sudo pacman -Syyuv presents btrfs-progs, even though:
> 1)  I do not, and have not, used the Btrfs file system with my Arch setup.
> 2)  It is "Required by: None"
> 3)  It is "Optional for: None"
> But I hate to reject it. After all, there must be some reason it was
> presented . . .  right?
> So, if I just say "yes" to all upgrades, won't my system over time get
> weighed down by excess stuff, until it grinds to a halt?
> Or, if I just make my best guess at what is really need and reject the
> rest, won't I have a Frankenstein system that will eventually break?
> And why, why, why doesn't it just present upgrades appropriate for my
> system?

More information about the arch-general mailing list