pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

Haakon · 2004-07-09 17:15:04

This morning, before I had a chance to finish my coffee, I dabbled around with pacman. There was a package I wanted to remove, but numbed though my brain were, the only word that could occopy my mind was "pacman". So I typed 'pacman -R pacman' and numbely pressed enter, my mind turning to coffee.

"Oh," said pacman, "I hadn't thought of that," and vanished in a puff of logic.

I hesitate to submit a bug report on this, but I really, really think there should be at least a "Warning! This will decapitate your system with severe prejudice, please type 'YES, I REALLY WANT THIS' to proceed". This way, if you really (in some moment of cognicient depravity) want to use pacman to remove pacman, you still can.

Thanks to good friends at #archlinux I reinstated pacman and all is well.

Xentac · 2004-07-10 00:20:46

Haakon wrote:

"Oh," said pacman, "I hadn't thought of that," and vanished in a puff of logic.

The fact that I can't remember the paragraphs around that quote (pseudo quote?) tells me I should read more Douglas Adams...

rubber-ducko · 2004-07-13 14:51:49

Hahaha, how the hell did you in the first place manage to even think to use the -R on pacman... I'm sure he was pretty pist off on you when he was back, aye?

Bobonov · 2004-07-13 15:35:46

That paragraph was about demonstarting taht God does not exist.
It was a philosophical discussion between God and a philosopher about the babel fish.
Since you have to trust in the existence of God without evidence and the babel fish is so perfect that god could have created it therefore God does not exist, and God vanished in a puff of logic.
It was more or less like this.

About pacman -R pacman
I think it is more a philosophical question if it can remove itself or not.
Fortunatly something like
pacman -R *
does not work, or at least I hope I didn't try it

dp · 2004-07-13 16:19:53

so you want a shell in what if you write:

rm -rf /

it gives back:

Hi root, can you please confirm your command by pressing at the same time CTRL-F1-AltGr-Home-T, so that i can be sure you for sure intended to do this?

:-)

... as long as it is not possible to run pacman -R pacman as normal user, its ok i think

Haakon · 2004-07-13 18:59:09

I disagree, it's not OK. In 999 out of 1000 cases, 'pacman -R pacman' is a destructive command that puts the user in a situation he doesn't want to be in. (Btw, statistic fact may or may not have been invented on the fly). I think that's worth at least a quick "are you sure?" from pacman.[/b]

Xentac · 2004-07-13 19:05:46

How about this? After we get 999 complaints about people removing pacman with said command, we implement the feature?

Either that or you do it and submit a feature request.

Haakon · 2004-07-13 21:11:37

Ok people, I need 999 volunteers! j/k

Yes, I see your point. I have looked at the pacman source on several occations, not making much of it. C is not my strong point.

sarah31 · 2004-07-13 21:15:43

haakon,

i agree with you that it should not be possible to easily execute such a request. but as Xentac says file a feature request. There is no need for you to try and hack a patch from the code if you do not understand it. feature requests are a part of the bug tracker.

orelien · 2004-07-14 09:01:15

IMO, extending this feature request to a configurable list of sensible packages would be more interesting, because pacman is not that sensible compared to some other packages (to my mind, glibc removal is possibly the worst thing than can occur...)
An new option in pacman.conf to specify to remove a list of given package only with user confirmation could be nice:

[options]
HoldPkg = kernel glibc pacman

Thoughts?

sarah31 · 2004-07-14 15:32:12

sounds practical since, as you say, there is more than just pacman that is silly to remove.

dp · 2004-07-14 15:57:43

orelien wrote:

IMO, extending this feature request to a configurable list of sensible packages would be more interesting, because pacman is not that sensible compared to some other packages (to my mind, glibc removal is possibly the worst thing than can occur...)
An new option in pacman.conf to specify to remove a list of given package only with user confirmation could be nice:
[options]
HoldPkg = kernel glibc pacman
Thoughts?

this makes sense - extending your feature request to something like this, would be great

EssentialPkgs = glibc ...

Dusty · 2004-07-14 16:38:07

I think the true moral of the story is not to restrict pacman, but to remind all users to drink their coffee before working on Linux.

measure twice, cut once, think three times.

Dusty

Haakon · 2004-07-14 17:01:18

I find that offensive! I'll have you know I'm perfectly capable of acting moronic even after coffee.

I'll submit that wish report later on (I tried registering with notifications to my jabber account, but that didn't seem to work). Thanks for great suggestions in this thread.

Dusty · 2004-07-14 17:38:11

Haakon wrote:

I find that offensive! I'll have you know I'm perfectly capable of acting moronic even after coffee.

Hmmm. something stronger perhaps?

Dusty

Haakon · 2004-07-14 18:07:19

Alright, here is my report. It includes orelient's generalization.

dp · 2004-07-14 18:12:39

Dusty wrote:

I think the true moral of the story is not to restrict pacman, but to remind all users to drink their coffee before working on Linux.
measure twice, cut once, think three times.
Dusty

drugs are not the solution!!!

dp · 2004-07-14 18:13:02

Haakon wrote:

Alright, here is my report. It includes orelient's generalization.

great

Dusty · 2004-07-14 20:23:30

dp wrote:

drugs are not the solution!!!

True enough... I don't even need coffee to keep me from removing pacman.

Arch Linux

#1 2004-07-09 17:15:04

pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#2 2004-07-10 00:20:46

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#3 2004-07-13 14:51:49

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#4 2004-07-13 15:35:46

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#5 2004-07-13 16:19:53

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#6 2004-07-13 18:59:09

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#7 2004-07-13 19:05:46

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#8 2004-07-13 21:11:37

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#9 2004-07-13 21:15:43

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#10 2004-07-14 09:01:15

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#11 2004-07-14 15:32:12

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#12 2004-07-14 15:57:43

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#13 2004-07-14 16:38:07

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#14 2004-07-14 17:01:18

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#15 2004-07-14 17:38:11

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#16 2004-07-14 18:07:19

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#17 2004-07-14 18:12:39

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#18 2004-07-14 18:13:02

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

#19 2004-07-14 20:23:30

Re: pacman -R pacman (do not try this at home)

Board footer