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Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!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#2734 - Eclipse 3.0.2-1 - files "exists in filesystem"

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Andy Roberts (arooaroo) - Monday, 16 May 2005, 09:39 GMT
Last edited by Dale Blount (dale) - Monday, 16 May 2005, 12:22 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To Paul Mattal (paul)
Architecture not specified
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 0.7 Wombat
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 0%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

When upgrading to Eclipse 3.0.2-1, the installation aborted due to errors like:

eclipse: /opt/eclipse/plugins/org.eclipse.update.ui_3.0.1.1/plugin.xml: exists in filesystem
eclipse: /opt/eclipse/plugins/org.eclipse.update.ui_3.0.1.1/updateui.jar: exists in filesystem

There were hundreds of lines like this with various filenames, all within the plugins directory.

I have run the Update system within Eclipse itself to receive updated (and new) plugins. Perhaps it is this that is clashing.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Paul Mattal (paul)
Wednesday, 27 July 2005, 14:54 GMT
Reason for closing:  Not a bug
Additional comments about closing:  This isn't really a bug but more of a larger debate. We can continue to discuss and create feature requests when we arrive at a course of action.
Comment by Paul Mattal (paul) - Monday, 16 May 2005, 12:46 GMT
Ugh. Yes, that is probably the problem.

This leads me to an area that needs wider discussion.. namely how to deal with this problem of plugins and upgrades in general in Arch. Part of me wants to use pacman for everything, but Eclipse is so centered around its update sites model.

I think for now you could just clear out the offending directories in the plugins directory (put them somewhere for backup in case this doesn't work for some reason) and then try again.

In any case, please let me know how it works out. I'm interested to keep tally of these sorts of experiences with Eclipse.
Comment by Andy Roberts (arooaroo) - Monday, 16 May 2005, 13:21 GMT
I have little doubt that approach will "work" in terms of getting the new version of Eclipse on my system. However, having spent a while installing various plugins, such as the Visual Editor and its many dependencies, I'm reluctant to remove everything, only to look forward to redoing the same plugin installations. I think I'll wait until Eclipse 3.1 if I *have* to take this route.

What is the actual issue? Is the package installation trying to overwrite files that already exist? If so, can't you just ignore?

Basically, I think you will need to accommodate the Eclipse plugin system. Or, you'll need to start providing common Eclipse plugins via pacman.
Comment by Paul Mattal (paul) - Monday, 16 May 2005, 15:04 GMT
The problem is that eclipse lets you upgrade the full eclipse libraries to the 3.0.2 versions via update. So if you do the update via their mechanism, you get the new libraries that are necessarily distributed with version 3.0.2 and thus expect to live in those directories. Do not be fooled.. some of the version numbers for plugins in v3.0.2 are still versioned at v3.0.1 -- also not very elegant.

Also, I did not mean to imply you should remove all your existing plugins. Let pacman help you. Remove only the directories that are the cause of conflicts.
Comment by Andy Roberts (arooaroo) - Monday, 16 May 2005, 15:14 GMT
Ah, that's a lot clearer now.

However, the idea of removing select directories isn't easy. The number of errors were so large that they scrolled off my console history (in Konsole, that is). It's not the simplest thing to wade through to obtain the troublesome directories.

On reflection, it is possibly best that once Eclipse is on, to IgnorePkg it and work via its own update panel. I can then manually upgrade when I feel like it.

If you need wider discussion, perhaps this could be taken to the forums?
Comment by Paul Mattal (paul) - Monday, 16 May 2005, 15:21 GMT
Yes, we should take this to the forums. If you have the inclination to start a thread, please go ahead, and point back to this bug.

It does appear to me that once you start using updates from Eclipse directly, it's probably best to stick with them and just ignore upgrades. I *think* but I'm not 100% sure that this will accomplish the same thing as upgrading to 3.0.2 by downloading/building the whole new version, but I can't be sure that every component will in fact get upgraded if you just use the update mechanism.

Anyone who happens to know more about this, please share! Otherwise, I'll get around to looking into it when time avails.
Comment by Paul Mattal (paul) - Friday, 08 July 2005, 19:14 GMT
By means of an update on this: Eclipse is switching to a model where best practice is to put each plugin in its own zipfile. This might make things a little easier to understand and make this problem a little easier to solve.

Just more thoughts for the discussion. In general, I am guessing there won't be a clear solution to this bug and that we should close it and handle specific issues as they come up.

Consider this a call for other thoughts before I do that.

Loading...