FS#9337 - two broken database entries : ardour and jack

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Xavier (shining) - Friday, 25 January 2008, 20:00 GMT
Last edited by eliott (cactus) - Thursday, 08 May 2008, 06:25 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To Aaron Griffin (phrakture)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 2007.08-2
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

Description:
ardour version is 2.1-1 in the database, but the real package version is 2.2-1.
jack version is 0.103.0-1 in the database, but the real one is 0.109.0-1

Steps to reproduce:
> for i in /var/lib/pacman/sync/*/*; do grep -A1 FILENAME $i/desc | tail -n1 | grep -v $(basename $i) && echo $(basename $i); done
ardour-2.2-1-i686.pkg.tar.gz
ardour-2.1-1
jack-audio-connection-kit-0.109.0-1-i686.pkg.tar.gz
jack-audio-connection-kit-0.103.0-1

Also, I don't know whether that's normal or not, but the CURRENT and CURRENT-64 tags don't match for these two packages. the 64 one is one version behind for both.
This task depends upon

Closed by  eliott (cactus)
Thursday, 08 May 2008, 06:25 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Additional comments about closing:  sounds fixed. reopen if needed.
Comment by Xavier (shining) - Friday, 25 January 2008, 20:14 GMT
A little note: the version in the directory name matches the version in the desc file. So the following command gives the same result :
for i in /var/lib/pacman/sync/*/*; do grep -A1 FILENAME $i/desc | tail -n1 | grep -v "$(grep -A1 VERSION $i/desc)"; done

This issue already happened in the past. Last time, Aaron said he had an idea of what was going on :
http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2007-November/010335.html

So should I file a separate bug for the db scripts or something?
Comment by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka) - Saturday, 26 January 2008, 08:28 GMT
CURRENT & CURRENT-64 do match for ardour
CURRENT-64 for jack-connection-kit is even newer now (Eric updated it 5 hours ago).
Comment by Xavier (shining) - Saturday, 26 January 2008, 09:31 GMT
Hm yes, ardour is fine now. I am not sure anymore if it was when I reported the bug.
But for jack, why isn't the last change (backup array fix) tagged with current too?

Anyway, I don't know if this tag stuff is really related to the original problem.
I only thought it was worth mentioning it, just in case.

Btw the database was fixed soon after I reported this bug (jack and ardour
appeared in the recent package update of arch frontpage).
So it's fine now.

My last questions are :
Is it possible to improve the db scripts to prevent these errors?
And should I file a different bug for it?

Loading...