FS#9699 - Option to -Su, except only on packages which would be forced or replaced.

Attached to Project: Pacman
Opened by Gavin Bisesi (Daenyth) - Wednesday, 27 February 2008, 04:40 GMT
Last edited by Dan McGee (toofishes) - Wednesday, 27 February 2008, 13:39 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category General
Status Closed
Assigned To No-one
Architecture All
Severity Very Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 3.1.1
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

It would be nice to have a pacman option which allowed a full upgrade, but only on items which would (in a normal -Su) be forced or replaced.

Example from current pacman:

[root@Muspelheimr ~]# pacman -Su
:: Starting full system upgrade...
warning: ruby: forcing upgrade to version 1.8.6_p111-4

The reasoning for this is to easily allow users to keep a system stable except for major changes (eg, qt4->qt), and for security updates (presumably, items are forced for security reasons -- correct me if I'm wrong please).
This task depends upon

Closed by  Dan McGee (toofishes)
Wednesday, 27 February 2008, 13:39 GMT
Reason for closing:  Won't implement
Additional comments about closing:  See comments
Comment by Dan McGee (toofishes) - Wednesday, 27 February 2008, 06:14 GMT
Already anxious to click the "Won't implement" closure reason here. This is not how pacman (or Arch!) is designed to work. I believe both of the above assumptions are not only false, but contradictory. You want to get both major updates and security fixes? Aren't those polar opposites?

If you want security fixes only, you need to follow a security fix only set of repositories, which the core Arch project currently does not provide. If you want major updates, well you are in the right place (and you'll get all the minor ones too).

By the way, force really has nothing to do with security updates- it just happens that some packages that do security updates with crazy version schemes need the force. The majority of patches have a sane numbering scheme though.
Comment by Xavier (shining) - Wednesday, 27 February 2008, 09:35 GMT
I agree with "Won't Implement". What you want is a different distribution with a different package policy, not new pseudo features in the package manager.
There seems to be quite a few people interested by an "stable Arch" project, but well, it's apparently just talk, and nothing serious.
But anyone is free to help make it happen.

Loading...