On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:32:49AM +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > On 29/04/13 02:33, Dave Reisner wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 12:41:50AM +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > >> On 27/04/13 10:00, Andrew Gregory wrote: > >>> Two weeks with no objections, so here is the full patchset. Several of > >>> the > >>> tests should be redundant now, but I left them in with updated rules > >>> anyway, > >>> just in case. > >> > >> Thanks - patches look good to me. I made a couple of comments on them. > >> > >> What we also need to figure out is the upgrade path here. There are > >> packages in the Arch repos with files in /lib/... relying on the > >> symlink at the moment. They will create conflicts after these patches > >> (which is fine), but we need to make sure they will upgrade fine to the > >> fixed versions. (They might already - but needs tested.) > >> > >> > >> @Dan, @Dave (or anyone else...): Do you intend to comment on this > >> proposal? Even an "ack" would be appreciated here. > >> > > > > As I mentioned to you on IRC yesterday, I'm still concerned that this is > > going to break my install pretty hard with /bin and /sbin symlinked to > > usr/bin. I've had this running for the past year or so without too many > > problems. > > > > Is that an objection? Every time there is a package in Arch with a > file in /usr/bin and a symlink in /bin your system gets "broken". I'll > also point out that you could only do this for that period of time > because you were using the git version of pacman.
Ok, that's fair. I suppose it's not really an objection -- I realize that I'm the unique snowflake here and simplifying the code like this is preferrable. > Anyway, I'm guessing there are two problems here: > > 1) Your local database does not match what is on your filesystem. As > our conflict checking assumes the local db to be right, this will > probably miss conflicts. So we need to correct the local db for anyone > who is currently using this "feature". This falls into the category of > figuring out an upgrade path. > > 2) When the local db is right, programs with files in /bin will cause > conflicts until Arch officially does that set up. That I do not > consider a pacman problem and you will just need to add them to your > rebuild list for this setup. I'd say this is not a pacman issue. Yep, I agree with this. So, +1 from me overall. d
