[pacman-dev] Pacman doesn't handle properly the multiple satisfiers, localdb corruption

[Xavier]

On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 09:34:28PM +0200, ngaba at petra.hos.u-szeged.hu wrote:
> > I failed to see why we would require to put the same package more than once
> > in requiredby.
> > I think it works that way, but it isn't necessary, is it?
> > At least I couldn't find a pactest for a case where this would be needed. Is
> > there one?
> Well, this is so rare as you said (AFAIK no real example yet) that you 
> can simply ignore it (I just put that comment there to remember us). 
> I've chosen this solution because this is not broken imho (the same 
> function does the requiredby add/remove) and this wouldn't worth the 
> O(number of requiredby entries) check for all inserting.

That check isn't a big deal on the performance side, it's totally negligible
compared to the rest. It's also a sanity check to avoid getting duplicated
requiredby entries.

But I find your solution elegant, and it extends cleanly to rare cases where
you can have valid duplicated requiredby entries (which means that check
doesn't really fit there anymore).
I don't think that sanity check is very important anyway (there are probably
much more important ones in other places that are missing).

Besides, for the current broken databases that have invalid duplicated requiredby
entries, it's probably very easy to find these, and it is very easy to fix
them, by just reinstalling the package.