FS#41661 - bluez-utils: /usr/bin/gatttool exists in filesystem
Attached to Project:
Arch Linux
Opened by Damian Nowak (Nowaker) - Friday, 22 August 2014, 23:41 GMT
Last edited by Doug Newgard (Scimmia) - Saturday, 23 August 2014, 03:01 GMT
Opened by Damian Nowak (Nowaker) - Friday, 22 August 2014, 23:41 GMT
Last edited by Doug Newgard (Scimmia) - Saturday, 23 August 2014, 03:01 GMT
|
Details
This looks absolutely safe to perform --force, nevertheless
there's probably some problem with these packages.
root@nwkr-desktop ~ # pacman -Syu :: Synchronizing package databases... core is up to date extra is up to date community is up to date multilib is up to date shur 160,2 KiB 2002K/s 00:00 [#############################################################################] 100% :: Starting full system upgrade... resolving dependencies... looking for inter-conflicts... Packages (2): bluez-libs-5.22-2 bluez-utils-5.22-2 Total Installed Size: 2,65 MiB Net Upgrade Size: 0,18 MiB :: Proceed with installation? [Y/n] (2/2) checking keys in keyring [#############################################################################] 100% (2/2) checking package integrity [#############################################################################] 100% (2/2) loading package files [#############################################################################] 100% (2/2) checking for file conflicts [#############################################################################] 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) bluez-utils: /usr/bin/gatttool exists in filesystem Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. |
This task depends upon
Comment by
Dave Reisner (falconindy) -
Saturday, 23 August 2014, 01:39 GMT
Why does this "look safe"? What package owns that file?
Comment by Damian Nowak (Nowaker) -
Saturday, 23 August 2014, 01:44 GMT
/usr/bin/gatttool is owned by bluez4 4.101-5
Comment by Doug Newgard (Scimmia) -
Saturday, 23 August 2014, 03:00 GMT
Which is in the AUR and therefor unsupported. It's up to the AUR
package to change, not the repo package.
Comment by Doug Newgard (Scimmia) -
Saturday, 23 August 2014, 03:00 GMT
Oh, and no, --force is not safe in this case.