pacman 3.0.0 in testing

phrakture · 2007-04-03 15:10:31

Husio wrote:

Anyway, pacman3 isn't as quick as I was thinking it would be

It's not fantastic, but it is improved over pacman 2. A real performance increase would come from changing the backend completely.

joaospinto · 2007-04-04 13:27:18

pacman 3 in current for when?

phrakture · 2007-04-04 14:50:49

I just added 3.0.1 to testing last night, covering a few important bugs from the 3.0.0 testing cycle. I'd like to give it a bit of time before moving to current.

joaospinto · 2007-04-04 16:04:07

1 month? 1 week? more time is relative :x

[vEX] · 2007-04-04 16:11:22

Rather an extra month and less bugs (perhaps even bugfree) than a quicker move to current.

dtw · 2007-04-04 16:53:01

As long as it takes

joaospinto · 2007-04-04 21:12:44

yes, i know, i prefer it bugless.. just not to keep running pacman -Syu twice a day hoping that it has already moved to current loool
ty

chaosgeisterchen · 2007-04-04 21:14:06

dtw wrote:

As long as it takes

When it's done *scnr*

No, not really. I think that we can trust in Phrak that he will put a sufficient amount of effort in finalizing pacman3 and then move it to current.

If you're really lacking patience that much, learn programming and join the pacman developing process.

Last edited by chaosgeisterchen (2007-04-06 16:47:21)

toofishes · 2007-04-05 03:41:10

chaosgeisterchen wrote:

dtw wrote:
As long as it takes
When it's done *scnr*
No, not realy. I think that we can trust in Phrak that he will put a sufficient amount of effort in finalizing pacman3 and then move it to current.
If you're really lacking patience that much, learn programming and join the pacman developing process.

This post gets a +1 from the pacman developers.

tlaloc · 2007-04-05 07:28:18

There is an intermediate solution, of course: Grab the version from [testing] or CVS and use it. Totally satifies your impatience/curiosity - and if you actually run into a problem, you may still contribute via the bug-tracker.

yankees26 · 2007-04-06 12:44:59

chaosgeisterchen wrote:

If you're really lacking patience that much, learn programming and join the pacman developing process.

This statement gets a +5 from me

joaospinto · 2007-04-08 19:48:15

[root@FIXO Desktop]# pacman --upgrade pacman*
loading package data... done.
error: unsatisfied dependencies:
yaourt: requires pacman=2.9.8

?? must i remove yaourt?

turtle · 2007-04-09 18:36:50

For pacman-3.0.1 and the command

time pacman -Qo `which pacman`

I get:

real 1m19.051s
user 0m42.021s
sys  0m13.233s

For pacman-2.9.8 and the same command I get:

real 0m2.226s
user 0m0.664s
sys  0m0.736s

What is the reason?

byte · 2007-04-10 23:19:13

joaospinto wrote:

[root@FIXO Desktop]# pacman --upgrade pacman*
loading package data... done.
error: unsatisfied dependencies:
yaourt: requires pacman=2.9.8

?? must i remove yaourt?

yaourt 0.7.4

Last edited by byte (2007-04-10 23:21:42)

barebones · 2007-04-11 00:56:48

Hey phrak, is there a change log for 3.0.1 any where? I'm just kinda curious whats up and it hasn't been updated on archlinux.org/pacman.

toofishes · 2007-04-11 03:05:04

barebones wrote:

Hey phrak, is there a change log for 3.0.1 any where? I'm just kinda curious whats up and it hasn't been updated on archlinux.org/pacman.

Grab the tarball and look there. I'll try to update the site sometime, but we are probably going to push a 3.0.2 soon and get it into current and I was holding off until then.

equadon · 2007-04-14 22:40:29

For future clients based on libalpm, wouldn't it be good to place libalpm.h in /usr/include, since the library files are located in /usr/lib?

toofishes · 2007-04-15 16:00:02

equadon wrote:

For future clients based on libalpm, wouldn't it be good to place libalpm.h in /usr/include, since the library files are located in /usr/lib?

pacman -Ql pacman | grep include

equadon · 2007-04-15 16:12:04

toofishes wrote:

pacman -Ql pacman | grep include

Thanks toofishes. My mistake.

unixlust · 2007-04-16 14:59:15

I have one complaint regarding rankmirrors. It depends on python to run, but nowhere after the pacman3 install is specified anything about this, so if you run rankmirrors just after a fresh pacman3 install, it says it cannot find /usr/bin/python. I guess this should be fixed. Otherwise, pacman3 is just awesome. Congrats !

Last edited by unixlust (2007-04-16 15:00:02)

toofishes · 2007-04-17 00:34:15

We don't want to make it a dep for those systems that have a minimal install. If "/usr/bin/python not found" isn't good enough for you to figure it out, than I don't know what is.

raymano · 2007-04-17 00:49:56

toofishes wrote:

We don't want to make it a dep for those systems that have a minimal install. If "/usr/bin/python not found" isn't good enough for you to figure it out, than I don't know what is.

rankmirrors could have its own package that depends on pacman and python, and it shouldn't be included in the minimal install. I don't think an error message is a good way of telling a user they have to install a dependency. It gives the impression that the installation was incomplete or buggy.

Just my 2 cents.

Last edited by raymano (2007-04-17 00:51:46)

Jessehk · 2007-04-17 01:58:40

I just reinstalled Arch after trying out the new Debian. I wanted to install xorg and gnome, but pacman defaulted to the (throttled) server at ftp.archlinux.org . So, I decided to use the rankmirrrors script. Well, I needed to install Python, but the server was (is) throttled.

I might have gone about it the wrong way, but it was frustrating.

Last edited by Jessehk (2007-04-17 01:59:01)

Snowman · 2007-04-17 05:43:24

Jessehk wrote:

I just reinstalled Arch after trying out the new Debian. I wanted to install xorg and gnome, but pacman defaulted to the (throttled) server at ftp.archlinux.org . So, I decided to use the rankmirrrors script. Well, I needed to install Python, but the server was (is) throttled.
I might have gone about it the wrong way, but it was frustrating.

You could've manually move a mirror on top of your mirror lists to download the python package from a mirror. The geographically close mirrors are usually the fastest.

Husio · 2007-04-17 10:26:55

phrakture wrote:

Husio wrote:
Anyway, pacman3 isn't as quick as I was thinking it would be
It's not fantastic, but it is improved over pacman 2. A real performance increase would come from changing the backend completely.

I thought pacman3 will use database (something small like sqlite3). That would make him quick.
Sqlite database is simple file, which actually is quite small (my aur script database, 6 columns, ~6tys PKGBUILDs is only ~1Mb) and seaching is damn quick.

Last edited by Husio (2007-04-17 10:30:30)

Arch Linux

#51 2007-04-03 15:10:31

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#52 2007-04-04 13:27:18

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#53 2007-04-04 14:50:49

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#54 2007-04-04 16:04:07

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#55 2007-04-04 16:11:22

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#56 2007-04-04 16:53:01

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#57 2007-04-04 21:12:44

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#58 2007-04-04 21:14:06

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#59 2007-04-05 03:41:10

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#60 2007-04-05 07:28:18

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#61 2007-04-06 12:44:59

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#62 2007-04-08 19:48:15

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#63 2007-04-09 18:36:50

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#64 2007-04-10 23:19:13

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#65 2007-04-11 00:56:48

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#66 2007-04-11 03:05:04

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#67 2007-04-14 22:40:29

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#68 2007-04-15 16:00:02

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#69 2007-04-15 16:12:04

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#70 2007-04-16 14:59:15

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#71 2007-04-17 00:34:15

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#72 2007-04-17 00:49:56

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#73 2007-04-17 01:58:40

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#74 2007-04-17 05:43:24

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

#75 2007-04-17 10:26:55

Re: pacman 3.0.0 in testing

Board footer