On 14/03/13 16:37, Connor Behan wrote:
> Calling pacman -Sp and pacman -Sup are guaranteed not to install a
> package. So the user's IgnorePkg pref is respected regardless of whether
> or not we print the mirror location. Therefore we do so in the case of
> -Sp as this gives the full information requested by the user. We avoid
> doing so in the case of -Sup as this would mislead the user into
> thinking that the upgrade is bigger than it really is. This fixes an
> edge case with devtools.
>
> Signed-off-by: Connor Behan <[email protected]>
> ---
> src/pacman/conf.c | 7 +++++++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/src/pacman/conf.c b/src/pacman/conf.c
> index 3f1b1c3..99e6af1 100644
> --- a/src/pacman/conf.c
> +++ b/src/pacman/conf.c
> @@ -1010,6 +1010,13 @@ int parseconfig(const char *file)
> if((ret = _parseconfig(file, §ion, 1, 0))) {
> return ret;
> }
> +
> + /* #FS#34066 - Querying URLs for packages specified on the command line
> (even ignored ones) should succeed */
Fine apart from the comment. I do not like referring to bug reports.
The comment should stand alone in the code and not require referring
elsewhere.
Also, the comment is not quite right as "pacman -Sup foo" will still
exclude "foo" if that is in IgnorePkg.
How about:
"Print URLs for all given packages on non-upgrade operations"?
If that is OK, I can make the adjustment when I pull it.
> + if(config->print && !config->op_s_upgrade) {
> + config->ignorepkg = NULL;
> + config->ignoregrp = NULL;
> + }
> +
> if((ret = setup_libalpm())) {
> return ret;
> }
>
