"Emile `iMil' Heitor" <imil%home.imil.net@localhost> writes: > While trying a full upgrade, pkgin would do the following: > > 14 packages to be upgraded: wget-1.16 sqlite3-3.8.7.3 redis-2.8.17 py27-twisted- > 14.0.1 p5-IO-Compress-2.066 iozone-3.408nb4 go-1.3.3 > p5-Compress-Raw-Zlib-2.066 p5-Compress-Raw-Bzip2-2.066 > osabi-NetBSD-6.0 py27-cryptography-0.5.4 freetype2-2 > .5.3nb1 > > 6 packages to be removed: tk-8.6.3 elasticsearch-1.4.0 sqlitebrowser-2.0beta1nb4 > qt4-libs-4.8.6nb3 openjdk7-1.7.71nb1 libXft-2.3.2 > > 14 packages to be installed: freetype2-2.5.4 py27-cryptography-0.6.1 p5-Compress > -Raw-Zlib-2.067 p5-Compress-Raw-Bzip2-2.067 osabi-NetBSD-6.1_STABLE > wget-1.16.1 sqlite3-3.8.7.4 redis-2.8.18 py27-twisted-14.0.2 > p5-IO-Compress-2.067 iozone-3.4 > 29 go-1.4 (44M to download, 20M to install) First, I find this really confusing. Some packages (freetype, go) are listed under "ugpraded" and "installed". It seems obvious to me that upgrade means that the currently-installed one is removed and a newer version is installed. (It also seems that this should be done with pkg_add -u so that it doesn't remove packages that depend on the old and new, even if those depending packages are unknown to pkgin.) So what is the reason why pkgin thinks it is ok to remove tk? This is totally baffling to me. > Debugging a bit further, I noticed that the packages to be removed all depended > on fontconfig, which is NOT to be upgraded because I have the latest version > installed (fontconfig-2.11.1nb1 from pkgsrc-2014Q3). Thing is, fontconfig from > HEAD, while also being at version 2.11nb1, does not depend anymore on > freetype2, and that makes the reverse dependency tree wrong for the 6 packages > to be removed, thus leading to their removal. I really don't follow how this leads to removal. Are you saying that the dependency tree of installed packages doesn't match the pkg_summary? I can see issuing a warning, but it does not make sense to remove anything. > My question is: was it a mistake not to bump fontconfig revision or must I take > that kind of wild update into account directly in pkgin? Maybe, but definitely this is a pkgin bug. To me, it should be a core safety property that if one does "pkgin *upgrade" (I think the "full upgrade" vs "upgrade" distinction does not make sense.) that no packages will be deleted, except maybe packages that are marked automatic that are no longer needed.
Attachment:
pgpc70e6Ub8UI.pgp
Description: PGP signature