%REPLACES% doesn't appear in localdb
 

Hi!
See _alpm_db_write in libalpm/be_files.c:
-------------------------
702 if(!local) {
703 if(info->replaces) {
704 fputs("%REPLACES%
", fp);
705 for(lp = info->replaces; lp; lp = lp->next) {
706 fprintf(fp, "%s
", (char *)lp->data);
707 }
708 fprintf(fp, "
");
709 }
--------------------------
So %REPLACES% field is not recorded to local db.
I know, that we don't need that field, but then we should remove 'replaces'
listing from -Qi. Since we have some other not needed but interesting infos in
local db (packager, optdepend etc.) I vote for remove that if(!local) line instead.

Anyway, is there any case where local != 0?

Bye


----------------------------------------------------
SZTE Egyetemi Könyvtár - http://www.bibl.u-szeged.hu
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/


_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

%REPLACES% doesn't appear in localdb
 

> Anyway, is there any case where local != 0?
edit: local == 0.

Bye


----------------------------------------------------
SZTE Egyetemi Könyvtár - http://www.bibl.u-szeged.hu
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/


_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

%REPLACES% doesn't appear in localdb
 

On Jan 3, 2008 7:46 AM, Nagy Gabor <ngaba@bibl.u-szeged.hu> wrote:
> I know, that we don't need that field, but then we should remove 'replaces'
> listing from -Qi. Since we have some other not needed but interesting infos in
> local db (packager, optdepend etc.) I vote for remove that if(!local) line instead.

I wondered about the same thing for a while.

I see no reason to keep it out of the local DB, it's rarely used anyway. Dan?

_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

%REPLACES% doesn't appear in localdb
 

2008/1/3, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:
> On Jan 3, 2008 7:46 AM, Nagy Gabor <ngaba@bibl.u-szeged.hu> wrote:
> > I know, that we don't need that field, but then we should remove 'replaces'
> > listing from -Qi. Since we have some other not needed but interesting infos in
> > local db (packager, optdepend etc.) I vote for remove that if(!local) line instead.
>
> I wondered about the same thing for a while.
>
> I see no reason to keep it out of the local DB, it's rarely used anyway. Dan?
>

Status on this? I couldn't found anything about this in git log.

--
Roman Kyrylych (Ð*оман Кирилич)
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

%REPLACES% doesn't appear in localdb
 

On Jan 8, 2008 5:30 PM, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/1/3, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:
> > On Jan 3, 2008 7:46 AM, Nagy Gabor <ngaba@bibl.u-szeged.hu> wrote:
> > > I know, that we don't need that field, but then we should remove 'replaces'
> > > listing from -Qi. Since we have some other not needed but interesting infos in
> > > local db (packager, optdepend etc.) I vote for remove that if(!local) line instead.
> >
> > I wondered about the same thing for a while.
> >
> > I see no reason to keep it out of the local DB, it's rarely used anyway. Dan?
> >
>
> Status on this? I couldn't found anything about this in git log.

I want to wait until 3.1.1 so it can get sufficient testing. Although
I think the exclusion is weird, I'm not sure how our code will handle
it on complicated upgrades as no one has produced a pactest yet to
test such things.

-Dan

_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

%REPLACES% doesn't appear in localdb
 

Idézés Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>:

> On Jan 8, 2008 5:30 PM, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2008/1/3, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:
> > > On Jan 3, 2008 7:46 AM, Nagy Gabor <ngaba@bibl.u-szeged.hu> wrote:
> > > > I know, that we don't need that field, but then we should remove
> 'replaces'
> > > > listing from -Qi. Since we have some other not needed but interesting
> infos in
> > > > local db (packager, optdepend etc.) I vote for remove that if(!local)
> line instead.
> > >
> > > I wondered about the same thing for a while.
> > >
> > > I see no reason to keep it out of the local DB, it's rarely used anyway.
> Dan?
> > >
> >
> > Status on this? I couldn't found anything about this in git log.
>
> I want to wait until 3.1.1 so it can get sufficient testing. Although
> I think the exclusion is weird, I'm not sure how our code will handle
> it on complicated upgrades as no one has produced a pactest yet to
> test such things.
>
> -Dan

We don't want to exclude it, we want to add it to localdb instead. Since
%REPLACES% is not there now, it will be just an extra unused but informative(?)
field like %PACKAGER%.
I wanted to exclude it from -Qi listing only, if you choose not to store the
%REPLACES% information in localdb (because then we always get "Replaces: None"
false report, like now).

Bye, ngaba


----------------------------------------------------
SZTE Egyetemi Könyvtár - http://www.bibl.u-szeged.hu
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/


_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

%REPLACES% doesn't appear in localdb
 

On Jan 9, 2008 6:22 AM, Nagy Gabor <ngaba@bibl.u-szeged.hu> wrote:
> Idézés Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>:
> > On Jan 8, 2008 5:30 PM, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 2008/1/3, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:
> > > > On Jan 3, 2008 7:46 AM, Nagy Gabor <ngaba@bibl.u-szeged.hu> wrote:
> > > > > I know, that we don't need that field, but then we should remove
> > 'replaces'
> > > > > listing from -Qi. Since we have some other not needed but interesting
> > infos in
> > > > > local db (packager, optdepend etc.) I vote for remove that if(!local)
> > line instead.
> > > >
> > > > I wondered about the same thing for a while.
> > > >
> > > > I see no reason to keep it out of the local DB, it's rarely used anyway.
> > Dan?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Status on this? I couldn't found anything about this in git log.
> >
> > I want to wait until 3.1.1 so it can get sufficient testing. Although
> > I think the exclusion is weird, I'm not sure how our code will handle
> > it on complicated upgrades as no one has produced a pactest yet to
> > test such things.
>
> We don't want to exclude it, we want to add it to localdb instead.
Um...thats exactly what I said. I just said it *needs testing*.

> Since
> %REPLACES% is not there now, it will be just an extra unused but informative(?)
> field like %PACKAGER%.
> I wanted to exclude it from -Qi listing only, if you choose not to store the
> %REPLACES% information in localdb (because then we always get "Replaces: None"
> false report, like now).
So my point still stands. Do you know for a fact that having a
non-empty replaces list for a local package will not affect conflict
and dependency resolving? Until you have proved this, I don't feel
comfortable making the change.

-Dan
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

%REPLACES% doesn't appear in localdb
 

Dan McGee wrote:
>
> So my point still stands. Do you know for a fact that having a
> non-empty replaces list for a local package will not affect conflict
> and dependency resolving? Until you have proved this, I don't feel
> comfortable making the change.
>

I have to admit I was also a bit confused by the whole discussion, but
didn't speak up because it looked like a minor problem.

To answer your question, it's actually rather easy. get_replaces is
really just used once, and that is in find_replacements.
find_replacements is only used for the -Su operation, and has 0 effect
on conflict and dependency resolving.

> grep -r get_replaces lib/libalpm/*.c
lib/libalpm/package.c:
alpm_list_t SYMEXPORT *alpm_pkg_get_replaces(pmpkg_t *pkg)
lib/libalpm/package.c:
newpkg->replaces = alpm_list_strdup(alpm_pkg_get_replaces(pkg));
lib/libalpm/sync.c:
for(k = alpm_pkg_get_replaces(spkg); k; k = k->next) {

And it's called on spkg, so a sync pkg, in a sync database.

_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

%REPLACES% doesn't appear in localdb
 

On Jan 9, 2008 9:40 AM, Xavier <shiningxc@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dan McGee wrote:
> >
> > So my point still stands. Do you know for a fact that having a
> > non-empty replaces list for a local package will not affect conflict
> > and dependency resolving? Until you have proved this, I don't feel
> > comfortable making the change.
> >
>
> I have to admit I was also a bit confused by the whole discussion, but
> didn't speak up because it looked like a minor problem.
>
> To answer your question, it's actually rather easy. get_replaces is
> really just used once, and that is in find_replacements.
> find_replacements is only used for the -Su operation, and has 0 effect
> on conflict and dependency resolving.
>
> > grep -r get_replaces lib/libalpm/*.c
> lib/libalpm/package.c:
> alpm_list_t SYMEXPORT *alpm_pkg_get_replaces(pmpkg_t *pkg)
> lib/libalpm/package.c:
> newpkg->replaces = alpm_list_strdup(alpm_pkg_get_replaces(pkg));
> lib/libalpm/sync.c:
> for(k = alpm_pkg_get_replaces(spkg); k; k = k->next) {
>
> And it's called on spkg, so a sync pkg, in a sync database.

Patches welcome from anyone, this shouldn't be a hard fix. Thanks for
looking into the details, Xavier.

-Dan

_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

%REPLACES% doesn't appear in localdb
 

On Jan 9, 2008 6:10 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 9, 2008 9:40 AM, Xavier <shiningxc@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dan McGee wrote:
> > >
> > > So my point still stands. Do you know for a fact that having a
> > > non-empty replaces list for a local package will not affect conflict
> > > and dependency resolving? Until you have proved this, I don't feel
> > > comfortable making the change.
> > >
> >
> > I have to admit I was also a bit confused by the whole discussion, but
> > didn't speak up because it looked like a minor problem.
> >
> > To answer your question, it's actually rather easy. get_replaces is
> > really just used once, and that is in find_replacements.
> > find_replacements is only used for the -Su operation, and has 0 effect
> > on conflict and dependency resolving.
> >
> > > grep -r get_replaces lib/libalpm/*.c
> > lib/libalpm/package.c:
> > alpm_list_t SYMEXPORT *alpm_pkg_get_replaces(pmpkg_t *pkg)
> > lib/libalpm/package.c:
> > newpkg->replaces = alpm_list_strdup(alpm_pkg_get_replaces(pkg));
> > lib/libalpm/sync.c:
> > for(k = alpm_pkg_get_replaces(spkg); k; k = k->next) {
> >
> > And it's called on spkg, so a sync pkg, in a sync database.
>
> Patches welcome from anyone, this shouldn't be a hard fix. Thanks for
> looking into the details, Xavier.

Bam? http://code.phraktured.net/?p=pacman.git;a=shortlog;h=woot

_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev