FS#747 - Bad Pacman Behavior with provides=() packages

Attached to Project: Pacman
Opened by Mike B (tehdely) - Tuesday, 13 April 2004, 22:05 GMT
Last edited by Judd Vinet (judd) - Tuesday, 13 April 2004, 22:11 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category
Status Closed
Assigned To Judd Vinet (judd)
Architecture not specified
Severity Medium
Priority Normal
Reported Version 0.7 Wombat
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 0%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

When installing a package that provides=() a package that is already installed pacman should treat this is a conflict and offer to remove the already installed package. Instead, it attempts to install the new one, which inevitably leads to file conflicts.

Of course a simple pacman -R existing-package, followed by pacman -S/A new-package works, but this behavior should be automatic. Two packages that provide the same thing should always be considered conflicts.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Judd Vinet (judd)
Wednesday, 28 April 2004, 01:27 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Comment by Judd Vinet (judd) - Wednesday, 14 April 2004, 00:40 GMT
This was implemented on purpose, but I'll think about changing it.
Comment by Judd Vinet (judd) - Wednesday, 28 April 2004, 01:26 GMT
I like having provides not imply conflict. To explicitly declare a providinng package to conflict with any other package providing the same thing, list the provisio as both a provide and a conflict.

for example, x and xfree86 would both have this:

provides=('x-server')
conflicts=('x-server')

Comment by Judd Vinet (judd) - Wednesday, 28 April 2004, 01:26 GMT
this trick will not work until 2.7.8, btw

Loading...