[pacman-dev] [PATCH 1/2] make -d less strict; add -dd option
Florian Pritz
bluewind at server-speed.net
Fri Jan 28 14:59:55 EST 2011
On 28.01.2011 20:48, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 2:11 AM, Florian Pritz
> <bluewind at server-speed.net> wrote:
>> From: Florian Pritz <bluewind at xssn.at>
>>
>> -d skips checking the version of a dependency.
>>
>> -dd skips the whole dependency check
> Periods are awesome, please use one. :)
Fixed.
> I assume this follows the actual implementation of this in the
> backend, even though it has a patch 1/2 subject? Maybe resubmitting
> just the two -d/-dd patches as a single set would be good to make sure
> I know what to apply here.
Oh sorry I broke that when using format-patch. :(
I didn't want to resubmit all 5 patches so I just exported 3 and 4 (old
numbers). This one is the fixed 3 and "[PATCH 2/2] makepkg: add
soprovides support" is the fixed 4.
>> - Skips all dependency checks. Normally, pacman will always check a
>> - package's dependency fields to ensure that all dependencies are
>> - installed and there are no package conflicts in the system.
>> + Skips dependency version checks. Package names are still checked Normally,
> Missing period.
>
>> + pacman will always check a package's dependency fields to ensure that all
>> + dependencies are installed and there are no package conflicts in the
>> + system. Specify this option twice to skip all dependency checks.
> No double-space.
Both fixed
>> *-k, \--dbonly*::
>> Adds/Removes the database entry only, leaves all files in place.
>> diff --git a/src/pacman/pacman.c b/src/pacman/pacman.c
>> index c267060..363b167 100644
>> --- a/src/pacman/pacman.c
>> +++ b/src/pacman/pacman.c
>> @@ -553,7 +553,14 @@ static int parsearg_query(int opt)
>> static int parsearg_trans(int opt)
>> {
>> switch(opt) {
>> - case 'd': config->flags |= PM_TRANS_FLAG_NODEPS; break;
>> + case 'd':
>> + if(config->flags & PM_TRANS_FLAG_NODEPVERSION) {
>> + config->flags ^= PM_TRANS_FLAG_NODEPVERSION;
>> + config->flags |= PM_TRANS_FLAG_NODEPS;
> Why do we need to back the depversion flag out at all? Given that
> nodepversion is less strong than nodeps, it doesn't make intuitive
> sense to have to do this.
I haven't checked that yet, but if it's not needed I'll take it out.
--
Florian Pritz -- {flo,bluewind}@server-speed.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/attachments/20110128/c297a455/attachment.asc>
More information about the pacman-dev
mailing list