> Dan McGee wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:33 PM, Allan McRae <al...@archlinux.org> wrote: > >> Nagy Gabor wrote: > >>> Some users reported duplicated database entries in /var/lib/pacman/local/, > >>> for example, both foo-1.0-1 and foo-2.0-1 subdirectories existed. (Bogus > >>> 3rd-party scripts, backup?) In this case pacman reported no error and its > >>> behaviour was mysterious. > >>> > >>>> From now on, pacman detects this situation and prints an error message. > >>> Signed-off-by: Nagy Gabor <ng...@bibl.u-szeged.hu> > >>> --- > >> Looks good to me. I have seen this on the forums a couple of times on the > >> forums and it is very confusing to diagnose what the problem is. > > > > How does `testdb` come into play here? > > I just created a fake duplicate db entry and ran testdb but it gave no > output.
With the patch, testdb just prints the error (when loading pkgcache), but the retval is 0. If _alpm_db_populate() returned with -1, then testdb would catch the error (and pacman would exit). First I wanted to choose this strict behaviour (duplicated entries => error, exit), but I saw that we never do that atm (with broken entries, etc.) and I was a bit unsure about sync repos (hm, maybe we should print the repo name in the error message...): Iirc pacman always loaded sync repos' pkgcache earlier, so a bogus sync repo would have made pacman disfunctional (including -Sy), and we have different GUIs. If we prefer the strict behaviour, I will resubmit the patch. Bye