How does pacman handle major software releases?

ixzus · 2009-02-25 15:00:02

Hi, to make the question clear.

When for example one has xfce 4.4.2 installed and xfce 4.4.3 comes I assume the upgrade is fairly straight forward since everything in the "meta-package" remains the same.
However, when a major release with big changes comes that's a different issue. The settings up to 4.4.3 where managed by the "mcs-manager" package, but in the upcoming
release the settings will be managed by the "xfce4-settings" package, therefore the old mcs-manager won't be upgraded, but unless told the new one won't be installed,
or will it be? And will the old one be removed or will remain there on the hard drive?

Well, that's the question. I'm not asking to implement a feature or complainig, I just want to know what to expect, and if it's got to be done by hand so be it. It's not that hard.
Thanks.

brisbin33 · 2009-02-25 15:43:57

I may be wrong so please, someone correct me; but i'll take this time to speak to the wonder that is pacman.

i believe what you're asking about is handled very easily by dependencies in pacman. in your example, the new xfce would bring in xfce4-settings as a dependency. you may see something like "xfce4-settings conflicts with mcs-manager. remove mcs-manager (y/n)?"

if the two packages weren't labeled as conflicting, mcs-manager would be considered orphaned (if not required by something else). orphaned packages can be quickly found and removed via some pacman-foo (man pacman for the options).

so the short answer: i wouldn't worry about it, -Syu in peace my freind.

edited for clarity.

Last edited by brisbin33 (2009-02-25 16:08:47)

Xyne · 2009-02-25 16:30:52

I disagree with brisbin33. Pacman doesn't check for new members of "groups" after they're installed. There really is no such thing as a "group" once those packages are on your system so I don't think it will detect new packages in the group unless they're specified as a dependencies of other packages, which won't be the case for all packages in the group because that would force the user to install all of the them, thus eliminating the point of having groups to begin with.

This would be solved by having a true way to track installed optdepends so that we could create true metapackages. I've made a suggestion (http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/12708) and so have some others, but it seems that this is not even on the todo list and most of the influential users/devs seem directly opposed to making any such change, even if it means living with the permakludge called "groups". (and yes, I would submit a patch, if I knew C or could hack my way through it well enough)

Last edited by Xyne (2009-02-25 16:32:45)

brisbin33 · 2009-02-25 16:45:25

ah that make sense Xyne. i guess i was too unfamiliar with xfce, as i assumed xfce4-settings would be brought in as a dependency not as part of the xfce group.

thanks for the clarification.

ixzus · 2009-02-25 17:06:26

aha, yes mcs-manager was not a dependency, was part of the xfce4 group, but you could choose not to install it though I did.

So this means that when xfce 4.6 comes I'll have to go and upgrade all the packages that are upgradable, uninstall mcs-manager and all its
not used dependencies (and the same for others packages in the group that might have been changed), and then install the new packages
needed in the new version. Is that right?

I don't know you, but to me that sounds like something with potential to break, at least the desktop experience!!

xaiviax · 2009-02-25 17:40:23

When upgrading to 4.6 in testing, it happened liked brisbin33 said.

Xyne · 2009-02-25 17:41:29

I think you need to keep track of which packages are currently part of the xfce4 group so that you can remove "orphans" after the upgrade if some of them get kicked out of the group. When the new xfce4 comes out, you'll just have to remember to install the group again (use the "--needed" flag to avoid re-installing the packages xfce4 pkgs already on your system).

You can always look at metapax on my site if you want to create your own xfce4 metapackage to avoid dependency issues in the future, but even that requires manual tweaking when new packages are added (but it would make group orphans "true" orphans, as far as pacman is concerned).

*edit*

xaiviax wrote:

When upgrading to 4.6 in testing, it happened liked brisbin33 said.

So the new packages are specified as dependencies of the old ones? If that's the case, ignore my previous replies.

Last edited by Xyne (2009-02-25 17:42:58)

xaiviax · 2009-02-25 17:56:02

The answer to your general question is handled perfectly by Xyne. In this specific case, you don't have to worry about it because the xfce4-settings package is set to conflict and replace xfce-mcs-manager.

Arch Linux

#1 2009-02-25 15:00:02

How does pacman handle major software releases?

#2 2009-02-25 15:43:57

Re: How does pacman handle major software releases?

#3 2009-02-25 16:30:52

Re: How does pacman handle major software releases?

#4 2009-02-25 16:45:25

Re: How does pacman handle major software releases?

#5 2009-02-25 17:06:26

Re: How does pacman handle major software releases?

#6 2009-02-25 17:40:23

Re: How does pacman handle major software releases?

#7 2009-02-25 17:41:29

Re: How does pacman handle major software releases?

#8 2009-02-25 17:56:02

Re: How does pacman handle major software releases?

Board footer