Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#10499 - 2008.04-RC iso doesnt install binutils

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Greg (dolby) - Sunday, 25 May 2008, 22:05 GMT
Last edited by Simo Leone (neotuli) - Friday, 20 June 2008, 06:46 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Installation
Status Closed
Assigned To Simo Leone (neotuli)
Aaron Griffin (phrakture)
Dan McGee (toofishes)
Architecture All
Severity Medium
Priority Normal
Reported Version 2007.08-2
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

Description: 2008.04-RC iso doesnt install binutils

Additional info:
http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=49156


Steps to reproduce:
Perform an Archlinux installation using the 2008.04-RC iso
This task depends upon

This task blocks these from closing
 FS#10702 - 2008 RC ISO related bugs 
Closed by  Simo Leone (neotuli)
Friday, 20 June 2008, 06:46 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Additional comments about closing:  See linked ppp bug.
Comment by Simo Leone (neotuli) - Sunday, 25 May 2008, 22:09 GMT
This might also be a pacman issue. I'm not sure quite yet...
Comment by PK (pelle.k) - Monday, 26 May 2008, 06:52 GMT
I've checked xorg, gnome, gnome-extra for this inconsistency, and thankfully there's nothing wrong there (feel free to try other package groups).
--------------------
[pelle@nemo ~]$ for package in $(pacman -Qg base | cut -d" " -f2); do pacman -Qi $package | grep -o "Installed as a dependency for another package" && echo $package; done
Installed as a dependency for another package
binutils
Installed as a dependency for another package
wpa_supplicant
--------------------
So it's binutils and wpa_supplicant that are the "oddballs".
Comment by Dan McGee (toofishes) - Tuesday, 27 May 2008, 11:03 GMT
This should only happen if binutils/wpa_supplicant weren't listed explicitly in the original package install list. Simo, can you confirm if they were listed there? A pacman.log from the install might be helpful here too, can the original reporter attach that?
Comment by Greg (dolby) - Tuesday, 27 May 2008, 11:59 GMT
I see that binutils was installed when i pacman'ed -S base-devel after the installation so binutils wasnt installed by the ISO
   pacman.log (1.4 KiB)
Comment by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Tuesday, 27 May 2008, 18:08 GMT
Dan, does -S groupname handle this right? That is, would doing a "pacman -S base" in the install ISO solve this for the future?

Personally, I think the installer SHOULD -S base, and then let people select other packages in addition to that
Comment by Greg (dolby) - Tuesday, 27 May 2008, 18:26 GMT
If you wish to solve it that way then there is another issue. Not all packages that appear in the installers base category belong in the base group. I remember two such packages. Lilo and dmraid, but there might be more. For one that uses ABS it should be easy to find out if there are more. I dont.
Comment by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Tuesday, 27 May 2008, 19:17 GMT
The installer crappily uses a text list of packages. I don't even know if we generate the list right anymore.
Comment by Greg (dolby) - Monday, 02 June 2008, 13:45 GMT
  • Field changed: Summary (2008.04-RC iso installs binutils as a dependency → 2008.04-RC iso doesnt install binutils)
Edited title to match the actual bug
Comment by Glenn Matthys (RedShift) - Wednesday, 18 June 2008, 08:27 GMT
This also happens with the PPP package, see  FS#10441 
Comment by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Thursday, 19 June 2008, 18:56 GMT
I will fix this with a new ISO release (this is the 5th bug I've commented on regarding that).

Loading...