[pacman-dev] [PATCH] Treat -Sc like an option

Dan McGee dpmcgee at gmail.com
Tue Mar 11 09:00:17 EDT 2008

2008/3/11 Nagy Gabor <ngaba at bibl.u-szeged.hu>:
> > On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 6:29 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >
>  > > >  >From now on 'pacman -Sc target' will first clean the cache, then
>  > > install target...
>  > >
>  > > This seems sane, I'm just not sure how useful (or expected) this
>  > > behavior would be. Can you give a use case?
>  > >
>  > >
>  > I actually think this could cause confusion. A user could very well think
>  > that pacman is going to clean only the target package.
>  >
>  > Scott
>  >
>  To be honest, the main reason for this patch was to clean needs_transaction()
>  and needs_root() check. See:
>  http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2008-March/011382.html
>  However, this wasn't just selfish:
>  * the current code also can be fooled easily:
>  -Sc needs root and clean cache
>  -Scg DOESN'T need root and [tries to] clean cache only
>  * We have no clear definition what will happen on pacman -Syucg foo (*)[this is
>  a syntactically correct command-line now], so imho this patch doesn't hurt
>  anything: users still should use 'pacman -Sc' "alone", but power-users can use
>  it in combination with -Su to clean-up cache (to get some disk space) and THEN
>  do a sysupgrade.
>  * answer to your fear: this won't be mentioned in manual and see (*): these
>  command-lines are already allowed with undefined result.

Well perhaps we should address the real problem then and find a better
way to allow/disallow options in combination with each other?

It scares me more to say "oh, the behavior is weird, so we aren't
going to even put it in the manpage".


More information about the pacman-dev mailing list