Community Packages

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Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!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#52979 - [rust] package name and group name are the same

Attached to Project: Community Packages
Opened by Jonathan Kotta (jpkotta) - Wednesday, 15 February 2017, 18:52 GMT
Last edited by Johannes Löthberg (demize) - Thursday, 27 April 2017, 19:51 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages
Status Closed
Assigned To Johannes Löthberg (demize)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Description:

The rust package name collides with the group name. They should be different, because pacman prioritizes packages over groups, meaning you can't install by group if the package name is the same (https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/27660). AFAIK, this is the only such group/package name conflict in Arch at this time (`for i in $(pacman -Sg) ; do pacman -Sg $i | grep -E "^(\w+) \1$" ; done`).


This task depends upon

Closed by  Johannes Löthberg (demize)
Thursday, 27 April 2017, 19:51 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Comment by Alexander F. Rødseth (xyproto) - Thursday, 02 March 2017, 10:20 GMT
Hi,

I think it is problem with pacman that package names and group names can collide.

If someone should ever name a package "base" or "base-devel", it would result in huge problems.

If pacman had a flag for specifying if a given string is the name of a package or a group, this should not be an issue.

Will consider making the requested changes for the rust package, for now, though.
Comment by Jonathan Kotta (jpkotta) - Thursday, 02 March 2017, 17:02 GMT
I totally agree that it should be fixed in pacman, but from the discussion of  bug 27660 , it sounds like the pacman maintainers aren't going to change it.
Comment by Alexander F. Rødseth (xyproto) - Friday, 03 March 2017, 11:13 GMT
Perhaps adding a flag or option for explicitly installing a package group could be within what's acceptable. One can hope. Will create a patch and give it a shot if I find the time.

Loading...