[pacman-dev] [PATCH] Versioned provisions

Nagy Gabor ngaba at bibl.u-szeged.hu
Sat Nov 17 06:10:31 EST 2007

> c) Could you please put SOME debugging back. It was there for a
> reason, and removing it outright is bad idea.
> Thanks,
> Aaron
1. To summarize my opinion about pacman debugging, please give a look at
smoke001.py output with --debug...
2. the old debugging was _fortunately_ broken (or at least misleading) in
alpm_depcmp: it printed debug message (match / no match) iff pkgname/provision
3. alpm_depcmp is quite an atomic function, and can _prove_ easily if it works
correctly or not (for example alpm_list_next doesn't print debug information
neither) <- the only information in its debug message: its input parameters (but
see also 4.)
4. if you "fix" 2., then even a single-package transcation will lead to
_thousands_ of depcmp lines in debug (search for satisfier in local and sync
db-s); back to smoke001.py: the fix would add at least 1 million (!) depcmp
lines (alpm_graph_init)

Do you still want it?
If yes, with 2-fix or without it?

SZTE Egyetemi Könyvtár - http://www.bibl.u-szeged.hu
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/

More information about the pacman-dev mailing list