[pacman-dev] [PATCH] New --nonew option (resubmit)

Nagy Gabor ngaba at bibl.u-szeged.hu
Fri Mar 7 14:20:58 EST 2008

> 2008/3/7 Nagy Gabor <ngaba at bibl.u-szeged.hu>:
> >  Of course I didn't try to break it, but I used -S many times to
> > upgrade packages. I still don't understand why I should upgrade
> > openoffice (I'm not an ooo user;-), if I want to upgrade audacious.
> >
> Because it's so much simpler to update the damn whole system rather
> than wondering whether a partial update will work or not.
> Doesn't that make any sense?
> Of course, there are many cases where you can do it, and it will not
> break. But there are also cases where it will break, which is why I
> was just thinking that maybe we should not add any features that
> encourage doing partial updates, or at least make it easier.
OK. I've never heart complaints against -Rd and -Sd; they are
the real database and system breakers. But they are optional, nobody
said, that you must use any of them. The same for --nonew. And using it
is _my_ responsibility, not the package manager's. [Btw, my philosophy:
If I'm not allowed to break my system, then my freedom is restricted
(or I am treated like a child);-)]
This was a FR, and personally I find it also useful. I don't see why
this is so dangerous (I mean it worth not to suffice some needs,
while there are no regressions to others). [Btw, I think this patch ugly
because of patching back-end instead of the front-end, not because of
its philosophy].
I don't think, anyone can convince me about the (assumed) fact that this
feature is bad, so I let the decision to Dan (as always). Technical
discussion are welcome of course.


More information about the pacman-dev mailing list