On 9/9/20 5:59 PM, Doug Newgard via arch-general wrote: > On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 17:41:28 -0600 > Javier via arch-general <arch-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Hi ! >> >> On Today's upgrade: >> >> % pacman -Syu >> :: Synchronizing package databases... >> ... >> Packages (9) ... tigervnc-1.11.0-1 ... >> ... >> tigervnc-1.11.0-1-x86_64 131.3 MiB 3.51 MiB/s 00:37 [########################################################] 100% >> (9/9) checking keys in keyring [########################################################] 100% >> (9/9) checking package integrity [########################################################] 100% >> (9/9) loading package files [########################################################] 100% >> (9/9) checking for file conflicts [########################################################] 100% >> error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) >> tigervnc: /usr/sbin exists in filesystem (owned by filesystem) >> Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. >> >> Usually that get fixed by using "--overwrite /usr/sbin". But I find it wrong for tigervnc to own "/usr/sbin", so I think in this case tigervnc is not right. Would this be the case, or it's OK for tigervnc to be the owner and then to overwrite? >> >> Thanks ! >> > > NO! DO NOT OVERWRITE! In fact, never overwrite when the file is owned by > another package, you'll just create more problems. This is a packaging bug, and > this package is currently uninstallable on Arch. > > Scimmia > Understood ! Actually I thought it to be dangerous for sure ! Thanks ! -- Javier
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
