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#31557 - Merge installing makedepends and checkdepends

Attached to Project: Pacman
Opened by Allan McRae (Allan) - Saturday, 15 September 2012, 14:48 GMT
Last edited by Allan McRae (Allan) - Thursday, 18 December 2014, 10:32 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category makepkg
Status Closed
Assigned To No-one
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 4.0.3
Due in Version 4.2.0
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Summary and Info:

Currently the buildtime dependencies (makedepends and checkdepends) are installed in two different transactions:

==> Checking runtime dependencies...
==> Checking buildtime dependencies...
==> Installing missing dependencies...
(makedepends)
==> Installing missing dependencies...
(checkdepends)

I would make sense to merge these.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Allan McRae (Allan)
Thursday, 18 December 2014, 10:32 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Additional comments about closing:  a774e4d5e26f6
Comment by Ashley Whetter (AWhetter) - Wednesday, 10 July 2013, 20:16 GMT
I've attached a patch for this. I've also sent it to the pacman-dev mailing list.
   0001-makedeps-and-checkdeps-a... (1 KiB)
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Wednesday, 10 July 2013, 20:31 GMT
Your array concatenation is wrong, and I suspect you haven't actually signed up for the mailing list, as your patch hasn't appeared there.

array+=("${anotherarray[@]}")

This is how you append.
Comment by Ashley Whetter (AWhetter) - Wednesday, 10 July 2013, 20:35 GMT
Woops. Looks like I sent from the wrong email address!

It definitely works without the quotes. What's the difference? I'll adjust my patch before I send it again.
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Wednesday, 10 July 2013, 20:38 GMT
No, it doesn't work. It's not the same at all. You should try it in your shell.

$ a=(one two three)
$ b=(four five six)
$ a+=${b[@]}
$ printf %s\\n "${a[@]}"
onefour five six
two
three

The point isn't the quotes (those I'm not interested in a patch that doesn't quote the expansion), but the parenthesis around the appended elements.

Loading...