On 07/25/18 at 02:23am, Morgan Adamiec wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 at 20:40, Andrew Gregory <andrew.gregor...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Based on how it's used, I'd say it should be SEARCH; it's being used > > as a filter for -Q and no upgrade transaction is being performed, or > > even prepared. > > > > Really, though, I'd say this is a great example as to why usages > > should have been implemented in the front-end or limited to only the > > highest-level library functions. Usage is contextual, how is libalpm > > supposed to know how such a basic function is being used? pacman may > > only use it as a filter for -Q, but some other front-end could use it > > to actually prepare an upgrade. > > The thing is pacman with not let you use -s with -u: error: invalid > option: '--search' and '--upgrade' may not be used together. By that > logic you could argue it is not a search at all. > Front ends aside the function is called alpm_sync_newversion, it makes > no mention to searching.
It makes no mention of upgrading either. > Slightly off topic of the original patch. Playing around more I've > come to find that Upgrade implies Install. Is that an oversight or is > it intended? > As for use case I would like tp pacman -S db/pkg explicitly and have > them upgrade but never touch the repo during a normal pacman -S pkg. How is that different from just putting that repo below the one you want it to use normally?