Dan McGee wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ > $ pacSyu > :: Synchronizing package databases... > pacman-git 0.5K 3.1M/s 00:00:00 [---------------------] > 100% > testing 15.1K 130.1K/s 00:00:00 [---------------------] > 100% > core is up to date > extra 312.3K 214.5K/s 00:00:01 [---------------------] > 100% > community 335.9K 148.4K/s 00:00:02 [---------------------] > 100% > unstable 4.7K 92.6K/s 00:00:00 [---------------------] > 100% > :: Starting full system upgrade... > warning: bzip2: local (1.0.5-2) is newer than core (1.0.4-3) > warning: kernel26: local (2.6.25-1) is newer than core (2.6.24.4-1) > warning: libldap: local (2.3.40-1) is newer than core (2.3.39-2) > warning: libtool: local (2.2.4-1) is newer than core (2.2-2) > warning: licenses: local (2.4-1) is newer than core (2.3-1) > warning: links: local (2.1pre35-1) is newer than core (2.1pre33-1) > warning: ntfs-3g: local (1.2412-1) is newer than core (1.2310-1) > warning: openssh: local (5.0p1-1) is newer than core (4.7p1-6) > warning: pcre: local (7.7-1) is newer than core (7.6-3) > warning: sudo: local (1.6.9p15-1) is newer than core (1.6.9p12-1) > local database is up to date > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ > $ pacSyu > :: Synchronizing package databases... > pacman-git is up to date > testing is up to date > core is up to date > extra is up to date > community is up to date > unstable is up to date > :: Starting full system upgrade... > warning: pacman-git: local (20080511-1) is newer than pacman-git (20080427-1) > local database is up to date > > Not sure when this got fuggered up (although It was probably me), but > as you can see, we have a problem above. For some reason, when all > databases have been updated except for core, it prefers packages in > core over those in testing? This could be a super-old bug, thinking > about it- We have an alpm_list_t of databases that are stored in conf > file order, and since all the other ones got updated (which means > removed from the list and readded?), core ends up getting bumped to > the top and testing ends up below it, meaning the core packages are > preferred. Note that when I first ran this, a libtool upgrade was > available, and it did not prompt me for that. However, the second run > did prompt me. > > Can anyone else try to reproduce this? Try deleting all .lastupdate > files except the one for core, if you have testing enabled, and seeing > what happens on the first and second runs of -Syu. > > This could be a prime case for git-bisect if we need to track this > down. I'm currently running a pacman-git I built yesterday (I think). > > -Dan > >
I can not replicate this at all... pacman-3.1.4 :: Synchronizing package databases... testing 15.1K 58.9K/s 00:00:00 [#####################] 100% core is up to date extra 312.3K 58.7K/s 00:00:05 [#####################] 100% community 335.9K 58.7K/s 00:00:06 [#####################] 100% :: Starting full system upgrade... local database is up to date pacman built from git (in last 10 minutes) :: Synchronizing package databases... testing 15.1K 58.0K/s 00:00:00 [#####################] 100% core is up to date extra 312.3K 58.7K/s 00:00:05 [#####################] 100% community 335.9K 58.8K/s 00:00:06 [#####################] 100% :: Starting full system upgrade... local database is up to date Allan _______________________________________________ pacman-dev mailing list [email protected] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
