FS#5061 - Wrong pacman -S behaviour when updating packages
Attached to Project:
Pacman
Opened by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka) - Monday, 17 July 2006, 11:27 GMT
Last edited by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka) - Wednesday, 08 November 2006, 23:43 GMT
Opened by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka) - Monday, 17 July 2006, 11:27 GMT
Last edited by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka) - Wednesday, 08 November 2006, 23:43 GMT
|
Details
There is a bug in Pacman with handling updates to packages
that was installed as dependencies for other packages.
When _updating_ such package with pacman -S pkgname Pacman marks it as "explicitly installed". This is wrong! When updating the same package with pacman -Su it remains marked as "installed as a dependency for another package" which is correct. Example (some lines deleted for better readability): # pacman -Su Targets: kernel26-2.6.17.6-1 libglade-2.6.0-1 libxml2-2.6.26-1 xine-lib-1.1.2-1 Total Package Size: 23.5 MB Proceed with upgrade? [Y/n] n # pacman -Qi xine-lib ... Reason: : installed as a dependency for another package ... Required By : gimageview gxine xfmedia ... # pacman -S xine-lib ... upgrading xine-lib... done. # pacman -Qi xine-lib ... Reason: : explicitly installed ... And now when using pacman -Su, this time for other packages like xine-lib (as we cannot upgrade xine-lib with -Su now): # pacman -Su --ignore kernel26 :: kernel26-2.6.17.4-2: ignoring package upgrade (2.6.17.6-1) :: Above packages will be skipped. To manually upgrade use 'pacman -S <pkg>' Targets: libglade-2.6.0-1 libxml2-2.6.26-1 ... upgrading libglade... done. upgrading libxml2... done. # pacman -Qi libxml2 ... Reason: : installed as a dependency for another package ... See? It differs! This _is_ a bug! |
This task depends upon
Closed by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka)
Friday, 10 November 2006, 21:59 GMT
Reason for closing: Fixed
Additional comments about closing: Fixed in pacman3
Friday, 10 November 2006, 21:59 GMT
Reason for closing: Fixed
Additional comments about closing: Fixed in pacman3
Comment by Judd Vinet (judd) - Friday,
04 August 2006, 05:45 GMT
Agreed. When upgrading a package, pacman should carry over the old
install reason and not overwrite based on the calling method
(-S/-Su)