Cancelling Pacman operations

Dusty · 2004-01-18 21:53:00

Is there anything wrong with cancelling a pacman sync, add, or upgrade in mid-download? Will it start from where it left off, or does it start over? Does it redownload files that it downloaded in a previously cancelled sync?

Where should I have looked to find this info, rather than ask a question?

Thanks,

Dusty

contrasutra · 2004-01-18 21:58:43

It will resume broken downloads.

Dusty · 2004-01-18 22:22:42

Ahhhh.... so it really *is* perfect! :!:

sarah31 · 2004-01-18 22:39:40

you are too easy to please. pacman is not perfect. no software application is.

Dusty · 2004-01-18 23:09:08

Point taken. I'll be harder to please from now on... can I still be impressed?

True, I have noticed "imperfections" in pacman, but they're all cosmetic (like a notice of about how long it will take for a sync to complete), so far... I'l say differently when it crashes. For now, If it works as the manual says it will, I'll give it a nicely qualified "better than average package management system" Happy?

Dusty

hApy · 2004-01-19 02:47:50

sarah31 wrote:

you are too easy to please. pacman is not perfect. no software application is.

you are too difficult to please. surely exaggerated appreciation / compliments should be taken as such.

lol.

Hapy.

Dusty · 2004-01-19 16:42:04

hApy wrote:

you are too difficult to please. surely exaggerated appreciation / compliments should be taken as such.
lol.

I thought of saying something like that, but didn't want to get myself into trouble.

sarah31 · 2004-01-19 16:57:56

personally i could not care less about what anyone says about me. i certain am not hard to please but i am realistic. i have been using this distro long enough to know pacman is nice, but not perfect.

as for taking exaggerated views as compliments. i don't have anything to do with pacman so that is not in my bounds to take compliments for somebody else's work. my comment was what it was realistic. sorry if anyone cannot accept that.

Dusty · 2004-01-19 17:26:22

Can't you be realistic and still have a sense of humour?

I appologize; I really didn't mean to offend you. As a new Arch user (though not at all new to Linux), I bow to your experience. But if you won't laugh with me, we can't get along. :cry:

Oh well. At least we can realistically agree about Windows emulation software. And you must think that Arch is the best distro available (even if it isn't remotely perfect), or you wouldn't be using it.

This is totally off-topic now...

Dusty

sarah31 · 2004-01-19 18:01:52

Dusty wrote:

I bow to your experience.

welcome to my ignore list.

the only reason i mentioned length of time was to point out that i do know pacman and related package management fairly well. it was not to get into a dick size comparison contest. your sarcasm is not welcome here and as such you will get no assistance from me now or in the future. not that you need it since you are "not new to linux"

btw i can laugh at or with you if i wanted to. my original post was taken far too seriously.... but i guess i am not entitled to my minor opinion.

as for arch being the best ..... actually i am considering using something else or getting out of *nix altogether. the problem is PC 's have zero resale value so it is really hard to get rid of the damn things.

dariball · 2004-01-19 18:06:22

looks like _today_ is sarah hassling day :twisted:

sarah31 · 2004-01-19 18:12:15

um when is it not?

seems i defend myself more than i "attack"

dariball · 2004-01-19 18:21:44

when it's "dariball hassling day" ...

i think this thread is a big missunderstanding, also it's even not good that i added my 2 cents to it...

and btw. attacking won't fit to u i guess... but also again only my 2 cents,
sry

Dusty · 2004-01-19 18:25:45

sarah31 wrote:

welcome to my ignore list.

Ahh, Touchy. It usually takes me a couple weeks to annoy someone that much.

I expect you won't be reading this now, but I still feel a need to reply... Hope nobody else has chosen to ignore me over this, as I'd like to help out with the project. I've made mistakes introducing myself to such communities before, but I guess I never learn. *sigh*

sarah31 wrote:

the only reason i mentioned length of time was to point out that i do know pacman and related package management fairly well.

and in all honesty, I do bow to your experience. That wasn't meant to be a jab at implied arrogance. Anybody with a post count like yours on a forum like this must be very knowledgeable. I am sure that I will be missing out on valuable advice, and honestly regret that we both misinterpreted the others' words.

sarah31 wrote:

my original post was taken far too seriously.... but i guess i am not entitled to my minor opinion.

I never take anything very seriously. I took your original post as a sort of banter, and replied with similar jest. Obviously I made a mistake. (This proves once again that I am human)

I've often inadvertantly offended people by not explicitly stating that I am joking, yet I just as often offend people by not explicitly stating that I am serious. My social skills approach nill, and if you think I'm bad across the network, you should see me in person! :oops:

At any rate, I believe that I have something to offer the Arch Linux project, and I hope other senior members will be willing to accept me if I can demonstrate such ability.

I would also like to appologize, with the utmost sincerity, for my words and behaviour and how they were interpreted.

Sincerely,

Dusty

Dusty · 2004-01-19 18:32:06

dariball wrote:

and btw. attacking won't fit to u
sry

I didn't mean to attack anybody. You're right about it being a big misunderstanding, but I'll accept the blame for it. I am the cause of many a misunderstanding.

dariball · 2004-01-19 18:45:41

nonono.....
hehe, i also never said u attacked someone, just talked about it in general, but let's just let it be for now, before we all start to shoot at each other )
( this was just a joke :-p )

Bzillins8906 · 2005-02-26 05:00:03

This post just seemed worthy of resurrection…. A classic within itself!

pixel · 2005-03-01 11:54:47

sarah31 wrote:

actually i am considering using something else or getting out of *nix altogether. the problem is PC 's have zero resale value so it is really hard to get rid of the damn things.

word Bzillins8906... it was one of those "hard" days for Sarah.

Arch Linux

#1 2004-01-18 21:53:00

Cancelling Pacman operations

#2 2004-01-18 21:58:43

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#3 2004-01-18 22:22:42

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#4 2004-01-18 22:39:40

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#5 2004-01-18 23:09:08

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#6 2004-01-19 02:47:50

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#7 2004-01-19 16:42:04

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#8 2004-01-19 16:57:56

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#9 2004-01-19 17:26:22

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#10 2004-01-19 18:01:52

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#11 2004-01-19 18:06:22

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#12 2004-01-19 18:12:15

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#13 2004-01-19 18:21:44

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#14 2004-01-19 18:25:45

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#15 2004-01-19 18:32:06

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#16 2004-01-19 18:45:41

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#17 2005-02-26 05:00:03

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

#18 2005-03-01 11:54:47

Re: Cancelling Pacman operations

Board footer