Nagy Gabor wrote:
>>From 6541daa508b3f4d050db61f7212fcedf45ab0120 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Nagy Gabor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 12:53:55 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] sync_addtarget rework
>
> Now '-S provision' handling is done in the back-end.
> In case of multiple providers, the first one is selected (behavior change:
> deleted provision002.py).
> The old processing order was: literal, group, provision; the new one:
> literal, provision, group;
> this is more rational, but "pacman -S group" will be slower now.
> Now "pacman -S repo/provision" also works.
> Provision was generalized to dependencies, so "pacman -S 'bash>2.0'" or
> "pacman -S 'core/bash>2.0'" also works;
> this can be useful in makepkg dependency resolving.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nagy Gabor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> lib/libalpm/deps.c | 19 +++++++++--
> lib/libalpm/sync.c | 68
> +++++++++++++++--------------------------
> pactest/tests/provision002.py | 15 ---------
> src/pacman/sync.c | 38 ++---------------------
> 4 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 97 deletions(-)
> delete mode 100644 pactest/tests/provision002.py
>
> diff --git a/lib/libalpm/deps.c b/lib/libalpm/deps.c
> index 1a6da96..e042166 100644
> --- a/lib/libalpm/deps.c
> +++ b/lib/libalpm/deps.c
> @@ -544,8 +544,14 @@ pmpkg_t *_alpm_resolvedep(pmdepend_t *dep, alpm_list_t
> *dbs, alpm_list_t *exclud
> if(pkg && alpm_depcmp(pkg, dep) && !_alpm_pkg_find(excluding,
> pkg->name)) {
> if(_alpm_pkg_should_ignore(pkg)) {
> int install;
> - QUESTION(handle->trans,
> PM_TRANS_CONV_INSTALL_IGNOREPKG, tpkg,
> - pkg, NULL, &install);
> + /* wow, we have a very stupid callback API here
> */
> + if(tpkg) {
> + QUESTION(handle->trans,
> PM_TRANS_CONV_INSTALL_IGNOREPKG, tpkg,
> + pkg, NULL, &install);
> + } else {
> + QUESTION(handle->trans,
> PM_TRANS_CONV_INSTALL_IGNOREPKG, pkg,
> + NULL, NULL, &install);
> + }
> if(!install) {
> continue;
> }
I already discussed this with Nagy on irc, but just a quick comment here
for others :
this part doesn't seem to fit well here, and could also be handled more
nicely by simply using a smarter order of the optional data parameters
(pkg,tpkg and pkg,NULL instead of tpkg,pkg and pkg,NULL).
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
