On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:48:37 +0530, Martti Kühne <mysat...@gmail.com>
wrote:
No one that hasn't touched the calibre software will suffer from the
existing files.
i haven't touched the calibre software -- if that means done any manual
changes to it's files. if you mean "used the calibre software," that i did.
Python (which creates those files when stuff is used)
packages now provide compiled bytecode which also saves the users'
power, and I think it's a great feature. The downside is that all the
*.pyc/*.pyo stuff is in many cases already on disk and it was actually
the third hunk in [1] that brought in the change. Look up the bug
report [2] that hunk is referring to, which is relevant in this case.
There were other such updates in the past for me - and I believe I
used some for/rm loop in bash instead of pacman --force.
i just moved the not-owned files somewhere else. wouldn't think of using
--force unless i knew exactly what was going on.
I think top
note in [3] was added at some point, which will both impose further
cleanness in python packaging and confusion on not-very-savant users
in the future. I also agree with pacman in that it should not handle
such cases, because that's what using arch means to me.
Alternatively, you could have informed yourself about what *.pyc/*.pyo
files are and answered your own question.
"RTFM" makes sense to me. "study python packaging before asking the list"
does not.
--
phani.
