FS#8054 - "Dynamic" IgnorePkg

Attached to Project: Pacman
Opened by Corrado Primier (bardo) - Tuesday, 18 September 2007, 15:36 GMT
Last edited by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Wednesday, 14 November 2007, 23:14 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category General
Status Closed
Assigned To Aaron Griffin (phrakture)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 3.0.6
Due in Version 3.1.0
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

It would be nice if the --ignore list could be updated at runtime, while a specific package is downloading.

For example, I have some core updates to do and I want them done quickly, while at the same time I have to upgrade openoffice, firefox, java, kde and other big packages. Writing a pacman line to ignore these packages can get more time than it is needed to download and install everything, and forces the user to -Syu, Ctrl+C and "-Su --ignore x --ignore y...". This feature would allow people to press a shortcut that tells pacman to stop downloading $hugepackage, and adding it to the ignore list, so that it can be upgraded at a later time.

Of course, some care must be taken: if the skipped package is a dependency for another package on the upgrade list, and there's a version dependency, the other package should be skipped as well, and the user must be notified. In my ALPM ignorance I suppose it is equivalent to a dependency recalculation.
This task depends upon

This task blocks these from closing
 FS#8109 - Pacman 3.1 Release Roadmap 
Closed by  Aaron Griffin (phrakture)
Wednesday, 14 November 2007, 23:14 GMT
Reason for closing:  Implemented
Comment by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Tuesday, 18 September 2007, 17:46 GMT
Hmmm, it could be done, but the real question is - do we want to do this?

I, for one, don't like any more interactive complexity into the equation.... perhaps there is another way we can solve your problem?
Comment by Corrado Primier (bardo) - Tuesday, 18 September 2007, 19:00 GMT
You are right, I was expecting this comment, and I for one am not totally convinced. The only thing a little more "pacman-way" I can think of is something like this:

[...]
Targets: foo bar foobar barfoo
Proceed with installation? [Y/n/s] s
Do you want to install foo? [Y/n] y
Do you want to install bar? [Y/n] y
Do you want to install foobar [Y/n] n
Warning: bar depends on this version foobar, it won't be upgraded now
Do you want to install barfoo? [Y/n] y

Targets: foo barfoo
Proceed with installation? [Y/n/s] y
[...]

As you can see it is a little clumsy, and I don't really like it.
Comment by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka) - Wednesday, 19 September 2007, 09:46 GMT
Such step-by-step process just adds unnecessary complexity, IMO.
This can be easily done in a GUI frontend by selecting/unselecting packages to upgrade. Then that GUI frontend can easily recalculate required dependencies and select missed dependencies automatically.
Comment by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Wednesday, 19 September 2007, 15:53 GMT
I think I agree with Roman's sentiment here: this isn't something we want to do in 'pacman', but it is a problem (albeit an edge case, perhaps). Other front ends are more than welcome to include functionality like this.
Comment by Corrado Primier (bardo) - Monday, 24 September 2007, 21:07 GMT
I can't say this is an edge case (in fact it happens almost once a week to me) but I have no problem in accepting your decision, it's ok for me. What about making --ignore able to accept more than one package, maybe separated by commas? It won't solve the problem but it will make it a lot easier to deal with.
Comment by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Monday, 24 September 2007, 21:18 GMT
I don't mean to turn a deaf ear on your problem, but the reason I say "edge case" is that, well, we make a lot of assumptions, like a fast network connection, and reasonably up to date system, etc

I like the comma idea though, that sounds easy and doable - I will mark this down as "due in 3.1"
Comment by Corrado Primier (bardo) - Monday, 24 September 2007, 21:22 GMT
Fair enough, thanks for your time :-)
Comment by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Wednesday, 14 November 2007, 22:53 GMT
Closable? Nathan implemented the comma feature
Comment by Corrado Primier (bardo) - Wednesday, 14 November 2007, 23:01 GMT
Closable for me, thanks.

Loading...