FS#40166 - Dependencies on individual packages don't show correctly (dev version)

Attached to Project: AUR web interface
Opened by Doug Newgard (Scimmia) - Wednesday, 30 April 2014, 23:02 GMT
Last edited by Lukas Fleischer (lfleischer) - Tuesday, 27 May 2014, 18:46 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Backend
Status Closed
Assigned To Lukas Fleischer (lfleischer)
Dave Reisner (falconindy)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 3.0.0-rc1
Due in Version 3.0.0
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

When you have dependencies listed in the global variables at the beginning of a PKGBUILD, the interface shows those deps for all package, even if those deps have been overridden in the package function of a specific package of split PKGBUILD.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Lukas Fleischer (lfleischer)
Tuesday, 27 May 2014, 18:46 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Additional comments about closing:  Fixed in 3.0.0.
Comment by Lukas Fleischer (lfleischer) - Thursday, 01 May 2014, 07:59 GMT
I am fixing this but I think there is a flaw in the .AURINFO format. Currently, we cannot tell whether a package section removes all depends ("depends=()") or whether it doesn't redefine the depends from the pkgbase section. In both cases, no depends lines appear. Will talk to Dave and try to find a proper solution.
Comment by Lukas Fleischer (lfleischer) - Saturday, 03 May 2014, 16:25 GMT
Should be fixed by commit 782e9eb (Fix parsing of array overrides, 2014-05-03). I updated aur-dev.archlinux.org to contain the bug fix, could you please test whether it works fine now?
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Saturday, 03 May 2014, 16:29 GMT
You'll need to build a new pkgbuild-introspection-git package, as well, for:

https://github.com/falconindy/pkgbuild-introspection/commit/6d4924dd431b
Comment by Doug Newgard (Scimmia) - Saturday, 03 May 2014, 17:01 GMT
The original bug report, overridden depends, seems to work great now. Still a potential issue in mkaurball, as using "unset depends" instead of re-declaring the array empty doesn't work. If that's not supported, that's fine, though, as I haven't seen that very often. I've used it because it's simpler to unset a number of variables that way.
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Saturday, 03 May 2014, 20:37 GMT
> using "unset depends" instead of re-declaring the array empty doesn't work.
I'm less interested in fixing this. Consider it unsupported for now.

Loading...