[pacman-dev] Fileconflict error...

[Nagy Gabor]

> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Nagy Gabor <ngaba at bibl.u-szeged.hu>
> wrote:
> >
> > I think this is not a regression, but a behaviour change. What did
> > the "old" pacman do when we have a real symlink<->dir conflict? I
> > mean a conflict which won't disappear after the upgrade_remove part:
> > fileconflict003 should pass.
> >
> 
> Yeah sure, that is why I still called it a fix. It fixed some cases
> (the fileconflict003 one), but caused a regression in others (like
> xulrunner case).
> But right, we can just say behavior change.
> Still, I am confused, when did this behavior change?
> I thought it was caused by the patch in the above bug report, but this
> happened before 3.1.
> And apparently 3.1 behavior is different than 3.2, because 3.1 handled
> xulrunner upgrade fine, and not 3.2.
> Maybe some other changes that happened in 3.2 caused this behavior
> change in combination to that "fix for fileconflict003" patch ?
> 
> >
> > P.S.: I will create a pactest for this case.
> >
> 
> That would be nice. And even better if you could find out when it
> broke :)
> 

I will go offline until evening. Cannot git be used as a testing
machine (with fileconflict004.py) here?

Bye