FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux General Discussion

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-25-2012, 01:16 PM
Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
 
Default pacman 4 logic error - what part of 'no' doesn't it understand?

On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 12:07 PM, David C. Rankin
<drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
> Guys,
>
> *I have found a logic error in pacman (I think). I don't like replacing both
> the kernel and kernel-lts in the same 'pacman -Syu' call. So I answered 'no'
> when prompted to 'Replace kernel26-lts with core/linux-lts? [Y/n] n'. However,
> then pacman fails to install anything because 'linux-lts and kernel26-lts are in
> conflict'.
>
> *When I answered 'n' to Replace kernel26-lts, I expected pacman to ignore
> upgrading that package (and the others I said no to) but proceed forward and
> install the remaining updates. Should I file this as a bug? The full output is
> below:

I think pacman is right. What you asked would make the installation
inconsistent: you don't want to replace kernel-lts and will try to
install linux-lts, which conflicts with the former. I think you should
first use pacman -Syu --ignore linux-lts and, later, pacman -Syu
again. That will have the effect you want.

--
A: Because it obfuscates the reading.
Q: Why is top posting so bad?
For mor information, please read: http://idallen.com/topposting.html

-------------------------------------------
Denis A. Altoe Falqueto
Linux user #524555
-------------------------------------------
 
Old 01-25-2012, 01:22 PM
"David C. Rankin"
 
Default pacman 4 logic error - what part of 'no' doesn't it understand?

On 01/25/2012 08:07 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:
> Guys,
>
> I have found a logic error in pacman (I think). I don't like replacing both
> the kernel and kernel-lts in the same 'pacman -Syu' call. So I answered 'no'
> when prompted to 'Replace kernel26-lts with core/linux-lts? [Y/n] n'. However,
> then pacman fails to install anything because 'linux-lts and kernel26-lts are in
> conflict'.
>
> When I answered 'n' to Replace kernel26-lts, I expected pacman to ignore
> upgrading that package (and the others I said no to) but proceed forward and
> install the remaining updates. Should I file this as a bug? The full output is
> below:
>
<snip>

I am fairly certain this is due to the kernel/linux naming convention change.
Telling pacman to --ignore ignore kernel26-lts,kernel26-lts-headers failed as
well, but ignoring kernel26-lts,kernel26-lts-headers,linux-lts,linux-lts-headers
did work. Probably not worth a bug report for a 1-off name change, but let me
know if you want it filed anyway and I'm happy to do it. The full output of
trying the --ignore is provided below:

[08:16 archangel:/etc] # pacman -Syu --ignore kernel26-lts,kernel26-lts-headers
:: Synchronizing package databases...
core is up to date
extra is up to date
community is up to date
archlinuxfr is up to date
xyne-any is up to date
aaany is up to date
aapkg is up to date
:: Starting full system upgrade...
warning: ignoring package replacement (kernel26-lts-2.6.32.53-1 =>
linux-lts-3.0.17-2)
warning: ignoring package replacement (kernel26-lts-headers-2.6.32.53-1 =>
linux-lts-headers-3.0.17-2)
:: Replace module-init-tools with core/kmod? [Y/n]
:: Replace perl-exiftool with extra/perl-image-exiftool? [Y/n]
resolving dependencies...
looking for inter-conflicts...
:: linux-lts and kernel26-lts are in conflict. Remove kernel26-lts? [y/N]
error: unresolvable package conflicts detected
error: failed to prepare transaction (conflicting dependencies)
:: linux-lts and kernel26-lts are in conflict



--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
 
Old 01-25-2012, 01:24 PM
"David C. Rankin"
 
Default pacman 4 logic error - what part of 'no' doesn't it understand?

On 01/25/2012 08:16 AM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote:
> I think pacman is right. What you asked would make the installation
> inconsistent: you don't want to replace kernel-lts and will try to
> install linux-lts, which conflicts with the former. I think you should
> first use pacman -Syu --ignore linux-lts and, later, pacman -Syu
> again. That will have the effect you want.

Thanks Altoé,

That's what I ended up doing. Looks like it was just the naming convention
change that caused the problem. The only 'bug' type behavior was that this was
an 'update' so if I didn't have linux-lts installed, why was pacman trying to
install it?

--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
 
Old 01-25-2012, 04:55 PM
Leonid Isaev
 
Default pacman 4 logic error - what part of 'no' doesn't it understand?

On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:07:10 -0600
"David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:

> Guys,
>
> I have found a logic error in pacman (I think). I don't like replacing both
> the kernel and kernel-lts in the same 'pacman -Syu' call. So I answered 'no'
> when prompted to 'Replace kernel26-lts with core/linux-lts? [Y/n] n'.
> However, then pacman fails to install anything because 'linux-lts and
> kernel26-lts are in conflict'.
>
> When I answered 'n' to Replace kernel26-lts, I expected pacman to ignore
> upgrading that package (and the others I said no to) but proceed forward and
> install the remaining updates. Should I file this as a bug? The full output
> is below:
>

There is no logic problem here. A full sysupgrade is a non-interactive
procedure; the only exception is conflicting packages. What if instead of LTS
kernel there was pacman itself?

--
Leonid Isaev
GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D
Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
 
Old 01-25-2012, 05:13 PM
C Anthony Risinger
 
Default pacman 4 logic error - what part of 'no' doesn't it understand?

On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Leonid Isaev <lisaev@umail.iu.edu> wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:07:10 -0600
> "David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Guys,
>>
>> * I have found a logic error in pacman (I think). I don't like replacing both
>> the kernel and kernel-lts in the same 'pacman -Syu' call. So I answered 'no'
>> when prompted to 'Replace kernel26-lts with core/linux-lts? [Y/n] n'.
>> However, then pacman fails to install anything because 'linux-lts and
>> kernel26-lts are in conflict'.
>>
>> * When I answered 'n' to Replace kernel26-lts, I expected pacman to ignore
>> upgrading that package (and the others I said no to) but proceed forward and
>> install the remaining updates. Should I file this as a bug? The full output
>> is below:
>>
>
> There is no logic problem here. A full sysupgrade is a non-interactive
> procedure; the only exception is conflicting packages. What if instead of LTS
> kernel there was pacman itself?

personally i think David's resolution is perfectly reasonable --
denying the upgrade/replacement of a single (or multiple) package does
not inherently negate the entire transaction. `-Su` in my mind should
try to update everything possible *within the constraints requested*;
if skipping the denied package (or --ignore'd, since as he stated that
didn't work either) and it's chain of dependencies (and possible
reverse dependencies) doesn't break the transaction (which i think in
90% of cases it wouldn't, but it may prevent the update of *many*
others), the i don't see a reason why it shouldn't proceed as ordered.

when pacman wants to upgrade itself, and the user selects "no",
doesn't it still upgrade the system with the old pacman? i've never
tried is why i ask ... but TBH, i was under the impression it would
behave as i outlined about.

if anything, i think pacman could just say something along the lines
of "Skipping packages X Y Z will automatically hold back packages A B
C, is that acceptable?"

--

C Anthony
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:01 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org