[pacman-dev] Bug with rxvt-unicode version check

Aaron Griffin aaronmgriffin at gmail.com
Mon Nov 26 11:56:14 EST 2007

On Nov 22, 2007 10:50 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 22, 2007 12:48 PM, Xavier <shiningxc at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 12:37:21PM -0500, Dan McGee wrote:
> > > No, the whole point of the filename field is to decouple the filename
> > > from being only based on the package name and version. We just happen
> > > to name our files the way we do.
> >
> > Decoupling it in which goal? Having filename independent from package name
> > and version, or introducing redundancy for more fiability?
> I guess I don't see the misleading behavior. I see that something
> broke somewhere, but nothing else. We shouldn't have to do dirty
> tricks with parsing file names, having every iteration of a package
> named the same thing should be perfectly acceptable- just ensure your
> database is generated right.

The intention was to "futureproof" the filename changes. Previously,
due to the fact that we DID assume the version was in the filename, it
was a big chunk of changes to add in the architecture flag.
Furthermore, not all potential pacman users will want architectures or
even versions in their filenames. Maybe I want my packages just named
"pkgname.lol" /me shrugs

The whole point of the decoupling is to allow us to remove assumptions
and allow us to make changes easier next time.

That said:

On Dec 25, 2007 12:10 PM, Tobias Kieslich <tobias at justdreams.de> wrote:
> I was following this thread for a while and I'm the one packaging the
> file. So far I have still no clue where I screwed up and what I did
> wrong in the process.

I have no idea either. Is this error in ONLY the db, or is it in both
package metadata AND the db?

More information about the pacman-dev mailing list