[pacman-dev] Optdepends (was: 3.2 "RC" release)
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Nagy Gabor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> One last problem : the pacman.conf needs to be updated. > >> Most important points : > >> 1) remove unstable mirror section > >> 2) add SyncFirst > >> > > This may be an overkill, but this can be mentioned in .INSTALL file > > too, because user may omit pacman.conf.pacnew. Or give a general > > message: "New options were added to pacman.conf, please check > > pacman.conf.pacnew (if it exists) and pacman.conf manual for > > details" > > > > Well I am not sure Dan would like that after what he said here : > http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2008-July/007136.html > I have a completely different opinion. IMHO the current OptDepends is totally _useless_: who checks them with -Qi or -Si?! Personally I have no clue which packages have optional dependencies. I agree with Dan, that optdepends shouldn't be put to install file (they will be "hidden" after package install), but I like that they are listed. I think pacman should automatically print them during package install. (Here we have formatting/localisation difficulties) This behaviour could be disabled (to satisfy Dan ;-). Bye ___ pacman-dev mailing list pacman-dev@archlinux.org http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
Re: [pacman-dev] Optdepends (was: 3.2 "RC" release)
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Nagy Gabor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Nagy Gabor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> One last problem : the pacman.conf needs to be updated. >> >> Most important points : >> >> 1) remove unstable mirror section >> >> 2) add SyncFirst >> >> >> > This may be an overkill, but this can be mentioned in .INSTALL file >> > too, because user may omit pacman.conf.pacnew. Or give a general >> > message: "New options were added to pacman.conf, please check >> > pacman.conf.pacnew (if it exists) and pacman.conf manual for >> > details" >> > >> >> Well I am not sure Dan would like that after what he said here : >> http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2008-July/007136.html >> > > I have a completely different opinion. IMHO the current OptDepends is > totally _useless_: who checks them with -Qi or -Si?! Personally I have > no clue which packages have optional dependencies. I agree with Dan, > that optdepends shouldn't be put to install file (they will be "hidden" > after package install), but I like that they are listed. > > I think pacman should automatically print them during package install. > (Here we have formatting/localisation difficulties) This behaviour > could be disabled (to satisfy Dan ;-). I didn't say "don't print anything", I was striking out against the renegade install messages that continued to grow more and more obtrusive. I'm fine with a patch that prints optdepends on package install (and probably also on upgrade if they differ from the previously installed version's list). -Dan ___ pacman-dev mailing list pacman-dev@archlinux.org http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
Re: [pacman-dev] Optdepends (was: 3.2 "RC" release)
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 9:12 PM, Nagy Gabor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Well I am not sure Dan would like that after what he said here : >> http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2008-July/007136.html >> > > I have a completely different opinion. IMHO the current OptDepends is > totally _useless_: who checks them with -Qi or -Si?! Personally I have > no clue which packages have optional dependencies. I agree with Dan, > that optdepends shouldn't be put to install file (they will be "hidden" > after package install), but I like that they are listed. > > I think pacman should automatically print them during package install. > (Here we have formatting/localisation difficulties) This behaviour > could be disabled (to satisfy Dan ;-). > I think I was not very clear and transformed Dan's words too much. I just talked with him and we agree on these two things : 1) printing optdepends is fine. I actually asked an user to write a feature request : http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/10630 , and I even assigned it to me. But then I ran into annoying problems. Please help, since you care about this issue. 2) messages like "check .pacnew file for new options" are useless. pacman already prints a warning when extracting pacnew files anyway. And you said yourself it might be overkill, so it shouldn't be a problem. ___ pacman-dev mailing list pacman-dev@archlinux.org http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
Re: [pacman-dev] Optdepends (was: 3.2 "RC" release)
> I think I was not very clear and transformed Dan's words too much. No, I've read that mail, and I reflected to point 2. (which I may misinterpreted: probably Dan don't like them on _upgrade_? Btw, packagers: we have pre/post_install and pre/post_upgrade "scriptlets"). > I just talked with him and we agree on these two things : > 1) printing optdepends is fine. > I actually asked an user to write a feature request : > http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/10630 , and I even assigned it to me. > But then I ran into annoying problems. Please help, since you care > about this issue. Hm. I've missed that FR, thanks. > 2) messages like "check .pacnew file for new options" are useless. > pacman already prints a warning when extracting pacnew files anyway. > And you said yourself it might be overkill, so it shouldn't be a > problem. > OK. No problem, I wasn't sure about it neither. I just noted, that some "lazy" users may notice behaviour change (missing SyncFirst option) after upgrade. Bye ___ pacman-dev mailing list pacman-dev@archlinux.org http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
