Pacman

Historical bug tracker for the Pacman package manager.

The pacman bug tracker has moved to gitlab:
https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/issues

This tracker remains open for interaction with historical bugs during the transition period. Any new bugs reports will be closed without further action.
Tasklist

FS#23433 - No reference to the -dd option in the help commands

Attached to Project: Pacman
Opened by ifaigios (ifaigios) - Friday, 25 March 2011, 18:29 GMT
Last edited by Dan McGee (toofishes) - Monday, 28 March 2011, 01:51 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Output
Status Closed
Assigned To Dan McGee (toofishes)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 3.5.1
Due in Version 3.5.2
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

Summary and Info:

The output of the commands "pacman -Sh" and "pacman -Rh" does not document the -dd transaction option, which was added in pacman-3.5.0, and still has the old "skip dependency checks" text for the -d option. The new option is not mentioned in pacman's man page either. Please add documentation for -dd and update documentation for -d in all of these texts.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Dan McGee (toofishes)
Monday, 28 March 2011, 01:51 GMT
Reason for closing:  Implemented
Additional comments about closing:  Commit e214b260efcba2
Comment by Dan McGee (toofishes) - Friday, 25 March 2011, 18:33 GMT
You're 100% wrong about the manpage, it is quite clear to me:

-d, --nodeps
Skips dependency version checks. Package names are still checked.
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. Specify this option twice to skip all
dependency checks.

The -h output is a legitimate gripe; we could do something similar here to what you see for -S -c documentation.
Comment by ifaigios (ifaigios) - Friday, 25 March 2011, 18:49 GMT
Uhm, sorry for the man page; because -dd wasn't directly mentioned, it slipped my mind that there was a reference to it in -d's description.

Yes, it would be nice to mention -Sdd together with -Sd in the output of -Sh, the same way -Scc is mentioned together with -Sc.

And thanks for the quick reply!

Loading...