Aaron Griffin wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Jan de Groot <jan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 19:08 +0100, Damjan Georgievski wrote:
error: failed to prepare transaction (conflicting files)
test: /test exists in filesystem
I think it has to do something with this:
[jan@server ~]$ pacman -Qo /usr/share/vte
error: cannot determine ownership of a directory
The point with directories is that there's no real ownership, as lots of
packages can store files in such a location. Now, what would have
happened if your directory on the filesystem contained files not
belonging to the package that is upgraded?
True, but pacman should probably check to see if the dir is empty, and
replace it if it is.
That seems like something dangerous to do, what if package A installed for example, /var/lock/mysoftware/ to keep locks for multiple purposes, and you install package B, which replaces /var/lock/mysoftware/ with a file called /var/lock/mysoftware (because /var/lock/mysofware/ happens to be empty at that point), causing package A to break.
Not only does it give the potential to break software (bad) instead of erroring out (good), it gives inconsistent results across multiple systems.
I wonder what would happen in the case of:
packageA: /foo/bar normal file
packageB: /foo/bar/baz normal file
With packageA installed, attempting to install packageB. I'd hope it
would error out somehow
