[pacman-dev] pacman, be quiet !

[Georg Grabler]

There is a provides array... for you to be sure.

As well - i also like this kind of behaviour. I once had problems with
my system, and was able to completely downgrade my system since i did
know all packages which came from testing...

On 4/20/07, Mateusz Jędrasik <m.jedrasik at gmail.com> wrote:
> Friday 20 of April 2007 02:55:50 Xavier napisał(a):
> > 2007/4/20, Mateusz Jędrasik <m.jedrasik at gmail.com>:
> > > I, personally, like this behaviour of pacman. I can right away see if my
> > > current mirror is out of date, and such messages are merely
> informational
> > > -
> >
> > hmm, that only happens when you're switching mirrors, right? I
> > personally always use the same one :) But I get your point.
> >
> > > however what I'd rather suggest is bump version/inform the person who is
> > > responsible for the PKGBUILD/ package in the official repos - getting it
> > > to the higher version for everyone who wishes to install it (if it
> indeed
> > > incorporates some news, i.e. if it's not a major version bump for
> example
> > > - there should be a separate pkg for those sometimes since not everyone
> > > plans on running the latest, as that doesn't always mean necessarily the
> > > greatest).
> >
> > Right, maybe in most cases, if the packages you're using is newer than
> > the one in the mirrors, then the one in the mirrors should be
> > upgraded.
> > But that's not always the case. For example, you might be running an
> > experimental version that shouldn't be in any mirrors, or you applied
> > some custom patches for testing, or you enabled/disabled some
> > configure options that will not make everyone happy.
> > I believe you can have valid reasons for building several custom
> > packages different from the ones in the repos, and you know they are
> > only local because you build them, and you don't want to have pacman
> > output spammed at every upgrade :)
> >
> > Obviously, if this information is very useful for several people, and
> > don't store anyone but me, it should just stay this way.
> > _______________________________________________
> > pacman-dev mailing list
> > pacman-dev at archlinux.org
> > http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
>
> I guess you could rename the package somehow then, as long as it's providing
> the proper dependencies... Dunno if there are switches in PKGBUILD like
> provides='blah' to make that happen without extra magic, I'm not too
> familiar
> with it yet.
>
> On the other hand there is always aur as well, which probably could sort
> things out. Anyway - it's just a small message - I don't see a reason onto
> adding functionality to pacman that is only usable to very few people, not
> only adding it, but making it the default - that is even less desired in my
> opinion.
>
> Regards,
>
> //m.
>
> --
> Mateusz Jędrasik <m.jedrasik at gmail.com>
> tel. +48(51)69-xxx-xx, +44(772)664-xxxx
> http://imachine.szklo.eu.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> pacman-dev mailing list
> pacman-dev at archlinux.org
> http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
>