On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 1:01 PM, David C. Rankin <drankinatty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 07/09/2012 10:52 AM, Mateusz Loskot wrote: >> >> Check the ArchLinux ARM forum: >> >> http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467 >> >> where filesystem upgrade is suggested: >> >> pacman -Syuf >> >> But, I'd wait until someone confirms it is the right way to go. > > > > Thank you Mateusz! > > We will wait for the all clear from the devs before forcing. Arch Devs, > when you can confirm a force is the proper way to handle this util-linux > issue, please let us know. I'm just trying to avoid causing myself grief :) One strange thing is that the files generating the conflict are owned by the shadow package. I don't remember of any warning about forcing updates for util-linux in arch-devel. It seems to me like a packaging bug. -- A: Because it obfuscates the reading. Q: Why is top posting so bad? For more information, please read: http://idallen.com/topposting.html ------------------------------------------- Denis A. Altoe Falqueto Linux user #524555 -------------------------------------------
