2012/8/11 Leonid Isaev <lisaev@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 17:29:46 -0500 > "David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 08/10/2012 02:25 AM, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote: >> > I can't believe this. You are an Arch user and it never occurred to >> > you that you should go check with a pacman -Ss gimp-light, and then >> > when there is no result, check the AUR? How about a pacman -Si >> > scribus? >> > >> >> Believe it. >> >> Here, the issue isn't "can't you check", the issue is "why did scribus >> attempt to satisfy a dependency with gimp-light?" That is why I posted the >> question. I had never seen pacman attempt to satisfy and dependency with a >> non-existent or aur package before. But it did. The lack of a gimp-light >> caused pacman to fail to upgrade anything. Thus, the post. The questions >> wasn't "why isn't gimp-light in the repos?" or "Is AUR the only place for >> gimp-light?", the question was "why/how is scribus looking for it in the >> first place?" >> > > It doesn't. Either you have a broken system or a voodoo magician nearby (and > we don't believe in magic). What was the exact error of pacman? > > -- > Leonid Isaev > GnuPG key: 0x164B5A6D > Fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D Indeed it doesn't, David. It seems 'gimp-light' provides 'gimp', so probably it is needed for some other package of yours. Maybe you can reproduce the error e paste in here ? Rafael
