[pacman-dev] Weird bug in sync/upgrade behavior

[Allan McRae]

Dan McGee wrote:
> dmcgee at dublin ~
> $ pacSyu
> :: Synchronizing package databases...
>  pacman-git                 0.5K    3.1M/s 00:00:00 [---------------------] 100%
>  testing                   15.1K  130.1K/s 00:00:00 [---------------------] 100%
>  core is up to date
>  extra                    312.3K  214.5K/s 00:00:01 [---------------------] 100%
>  community                335.9K  148.4K/s 00:00:02 [---------------------] 100%
>  unstable                   4.7K   92.6K/s 00:00:00 [---------------------] 100%
> :: Starting full system upgrade...
> warning: bzip2: local (1.0.5-2) is newer than core (1.0.4-3)
> warning: kernel26: local (2.6.25-1) is newer than core (2.6.24.4-1)
> warning: libldap: local (2.3.40-1) is newer than core (2.3.39-2)
> warning: libtool: local (2.2.4-1) is newer than core (2.2-2)
> warning: licenses: local (2.4-1) is newer than core (2.3-1)
> warning: links: local (2.1pre35-1) is newer than core (2.1pre33-1)
> warning: ntfs-3g: local (1.2412-1) is newer than core (1.2310-1)
> warning: openssh: local (5.0p1-1) is newer than core (4.7p1-6)
> warning: pcre: local (7.7-1) is newer than core (7.6-3)
> warning: sudo: local (1.6.9p15-1) is newer than core (1.6.9p12-1)
>  local database is up to date
>
> dmcgee at dublin ~
> $ pacSyu
> :: Synchronizing package databases...
>  pacman-git is up to date
>  testing is up to date
>  core is up to date
>  extra is up to date
>  community is up to date
>  unstable is up to date
> :: Starting full system upgrade...
> warning: pacman-git: local (20080511-1) is newer than pacman-git (20080427-1)
>  local database is up to date
>
> Not sure when this got fuggered up (although It was probably me), but
> as you can see, we have a problem above. For some reason, when all
> databases have been updated except for core, it prefers packages in
> core over those in testing? This could be a super-old bug, thinking
> about it- We have an alpm_list_t of databases that are stored in conf
> file order, and since all the other ones got updated (which means
> removed from the list and readded?), core ends up getting bumped to
> the top and testing ends up below it, meaning the core packages are
> preferred. Note that when I first ran this, a libtool upgrade was
> available, and it did not prompt me for that. However, the second run
> did prompt me.
>
> Can anyone else try to reproduce this? Try deleting all .lastupdate
> files except the one for core, if you have testing enabled, and seeing
> what happens on the first and second runs of -Syu.
>
> This could be a prime case for git-bisect if we need to track this
> down. I'm currently running a pacman-git I built yesterday (I think).
>
> -Dan
>
>   

I can not replicate this at all...

pacman-3.1.4
:: Synchronizing package databases...
 testing                   15.1K   58.9K/s 00:00:00 
[#####################] 100%
 core is up to date
 extra                    312.3K   58.7K/s 00:00:05 
[#####################] 100%
 community                335.9K   58.7K/s 00:00:06 
[#####################] 100%
:: Starting full system upgrade...
 local database is up to date

pacman built from git (in last 10 minutes)
:: Synchronizing package databases...
 testing                   15.1K   58.0K/s 00:00:00 
[#####################] 100%
 core is up to date
 extra                    312.3K   58.7K/s 00:00:05 
[#####################] 100%
 community                335.9K   58.8K/s 00:00:06 
[#####################] 100%
:: Starting full system upgrade...
 local database is up to date

Allan