FS#9673 - Makepkg don't use force when installing missing depends
Attached to Project:
Pacman
Opened by Ismael Barros (RazZziel) - Sunday, 24 February 2008, 20:09 GMT
Last edited by Dan McGee (toofishes) - Thursday, 28 February 2008, 00:57 GMT
Opened by Ismael Barros (RazZziel) - Sunday, 24 February 2008, 20:09 GMT
Last edited by Dan McGee (toofishes) - Thursday, 28 February 2008, 00:57 GMT
|
Details
Description:
If makepkg is installing a dependency that should be installed with "pacman -f" option, the installation fails. One posible solution would be to add to makepkg an option to emulate the "pacman -f" behaviour when installing depends, or always to adopt such behaviour. This bug comes from a yaourt bug: see http://bugs.archlinux.fr/task/104 to obtain a complete explanation. |
This task depends upon
Closed by Dan McGee (toofishes)
Thursday, 28 February 2008, 00:57 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't fix
Additional comments about closing: No.
Thursday, 28 February 2008, 00:57 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't fix
Additional comments about closing: No.
"Maybe you can add a request for that on bugs.archlinux.org ? (add an option to bypass conflict's test when installing deps).
*If it's not accepted by the arch devs*, I can work on a yaourt's way to solve this problem, but it's far more complicated. I think makepkg should manage this case itself."
Well, I guess you won't be too much surprised if it's not accepted. Doing this is really ugly, we should highly discourage the usage of -f option, not encourage it.
Adding this to makepkg totally goes in the wrong direction. The force option should be used with care, and on as little packages as necessary.
If you had it in makepkg, you couldn't even control which packages would be forced.
I can only suggest that yaourt refuses to implement it as well :)
"When I run yaourt -Sf to avoid "file already exists" errors..."
Why the hell are you doing this! Ugh, this just makes me cringe. I hate the -f option, but it does have its *niche* purpose. It is NOT meant to be used all the time. NOT.
"...or always to adopt such behaviour."
Wow. I am going to stop typing before I get more pissed, and just close this. Ugh.