On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Marco<domanov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Edgar, > >> Off topic: The ~2 G size of the installed packages pacman >> shows is complete size of all updated packages not the >> difference between the currently installed size and the size >> after the upgrade, right? So the complete upgrade might >> have worked for you. > > Bad experiences have thaught me not to do that. It might have, though. > I didn't follow the development of pacman, so I actually don't know if > there is a sort of check on available disk space yet. > No check on available disk space : http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/11639 It is more complicated than it sounds, the old check was problematic so it was removed : http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=pacman.git;a=commitdiff;h=ed13ac2cc8dd15d8a1 Estimating upgrade size is not easy either, it is not only "new size - old size". Maybe "new installed size - old installed size + new packaged size" would be accurate enough. But this is meaningless on a partitioned system. Also it does not take eventual scriptlets which could create files during install. > Why not implement a '--no-cache' option for pacman, to delete the > downloaded tar.gz right after the successful installation of each pkg? > This was also requested here : http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9710 As Nagy mentioned, one problem here is that file-conflicts check require to first download all the packages.
