• Bug with pacman?


    Hey guys i noticed a bug some time ago but at that time i thought was something wrong with the code of my unofficial offline installer
    Explaining the situation (sorry for the long text):
    I added an online installer in my iso and tested the install procedure for a simple text editor pluma. The problem was that after the system was installed pluma was installed but the system didn’t install it’s dependencies. At first i thought powerpill with option -Sw was only downloading the package ignoring dependencies, so i added a reduntant code to check dependencies and even dependencies of dependencies using both pactree and expac.
    Today i decided to test pacaur due the topic yaourt VS. pacaur: what do you think? and HEY the same bug…
    So then i tried using pacman -S and HEY THE SAME BUG!!!

    if you use pacman -Si pluma you’ll see that there are both Arch and Antergos repos, and they use different dependencies, so i’m guessing that pacman find some conflict and can’t decide which dependencies must be choosen…

    But the point is: if this is happening with more packages? I mean installed packages that simple won’t launch (not properly installed)…

    OBS: The bug was found in my .iso so i don’t know if is happening in Antergos .iso/system. My real Antergos system already has pluma installed so i can’t test further…

    Can somebody test this too and confirm or not this pacman bug?

    Thank you for your attention.

    Antergos (default OS) - WIN10 (abandoned)
    I3wm - Mate desktop
    AMD - A4 7300 Radeon graphics
    16 GB ram
    HD 1 TB
    Linux newbie since 06/2016

  • @fernandomaroto said in Bug with pacman?:

    if you use pacman -Si pluma you’ll see that there are both Arch and Antergos repos, and they use different dependencies, so i’m guessing that pacman find some conflict and can’t decide which dependencies must be choosen…

    It shouldn’t. And certainly not without a warning of some kind. What happens if you qualify the package with the repo name. e.g. pacman -S community/pluma.

  • @Krugar said in Bug with pacman?:

    It shouldn’t. And certainly not without a warning of some kind. What happens if you qualify the package with the repo name. e.g. pacman -S community/pluma.

    then pacman downloaded the missing dependency and pluma launched normally…

    Antergos (default OS) - WIN10 (abandoned)
    I3wm - Mate desktop
    AMD - A4 7300 Radeon graphics
    16 GB ram
    HD 1 TB
    Linux newbie since 06/2016

  • but could be a problem with the pluma package from Antergos itself… also if i pacman -S antergos/pluma it do not install dependencies…

    I can not find it here: https://github.com/Antergos/antergos-packages/tree/master/antergos
    but here yes: https://build.antergos.com/package/pluma

    [updates once a week] = [90% less problems]
    [Li{u}n//u//{i}x] since 1988 - overcoming failure means success
    howto-install-antergos
    how to add system logs
    i3 GNOME

  • @joekamprad said in Bug with pacman?:

    pacman -S antergos/pluma

    Ah good @Krugar and @joekamprad

    pacman -S community/pluma install correctly
    pacman -S antergos/pluma doesn’t install missing dependencies

    I’ll leave to @developers to check it out then…

    Antergos (default OS) - WIN10 (abandoned)
    I3wm - Mate desktop
    AMD - A4 7300 Radeon graphics
    16 GB ram
    HD 1 TB
    Linux newbie since 06/2016

  • @joekamprad

    https://github.com/Antergos/antergos-packages/tree/master/antergos/mate

    antergos/pluma installs perfectly here ¿?

    @fernandomaroto

    Can you post exactly which dependency error you were seeing when trying to install pluma?

  • @karasu https://github.com/Antergos/antergos-packages/issues/238 to fast we both…

    [updates once a week] = [90% less problems]
    [Li{u}n//u//{i}x] since 1988 - overcoming failure means success
    howto-install-antergos
    how to add system logs
    i3 GNOME

  • sudo pacman -S antergos/pluma
    resolving dependencies...
    looking for conflicting packages...
    
    Packages (1) pluma-1.18.2-1
    
    Total Installed Size:  15.89 MiB
    
    :: Proceed with installation? [Y/n] y
    (1/1) checking keys in keyring                                      [######################################] 100%
    (1/1) checking package integrity                                    [######################################] 100%
    (1/1) loading package files                                         [######################################] 100%
    (1/1) checking for file conflicts                                   [######################################] 100%
    (1/1) checking available disk space                                 [######################################] 100%
    :: Processing package changes...
    (1/1) installing pluma                                              [######################################] 100%
    Optional dependencies for pluma
        yelp: for reading MATE help documents
    :: Running post-transaction hooks...
    (1/3) Compiling GSettings XML schema files...
    (2/3) Arming ConditionNeedsUpdate...
    (3/3) Updating the desktop file MIME type cache...
    
    
    sudo pacman -S community/pluma
    resolving dependencies...
    looking for conflicting packages...
    
    Packages (2) mate-desktop-1.18.0-1  pluma-1.18.2-1
    
    Total Download Size:    0.55 MiB
    Total Installed Size:  18.87 MiB
    
    :: Proceed with installation? [Y/n] Y
    :: Retrieving packages...
    
    

    [updates once a week] = [90% less problems]
    [Li{u}n//u//{i}x] since 1988 - overcoming failure means success
    howto-install-antergos
    how to add system logs
    i3 GNOME

  • Hi,

    Our package tries to be minimal (see how community/pluma pulls the entire mate-desktop).

    I did not package MATE (@lots-0-logs did) so I fear his wrath if I change anything… :grin:

    You can see that our package does not pull mate-desktop (I think our intention was to be able to install a “minimal” mate, but as I wasn’t involved in the process I really don’t know for sure).

  • @karasu said in Bug with pacman?:

    @joekamprad

    https://github.com/Antergos/antergos-packages/tree/master/antergos/mate

    antergos/pluma installs perfectly here ¿?

    @fernandomaroto

    Can you post exactly which dependency error you were seeing when trying to install pluma?

    Gives no error, pacman simply install the package without installing the missing dependency, also didn’t list the missing dependency,

    You can see that our package does not pull mate-desktop (I think our intention was to be able to install a “minimal” mate, but as I wasn’t involved in the process I really don’t know for sure).

    But is a dependency (checking with pacman -Si), so if i don’t install mate DE simply won’t work untill i manually install the dependency.

    Antergos (default OS) - WIN10 (abandoned)
    I3wm - Mate desktop
    AMD - A4 7300 Radeon graphics
    16 GB ram
    HD 1 TB
    Linux newbie since 06/2016

  • @karasu said in Bug with pacman?:

    You can see that our package does not pull mate-desktop (I think our intention was to be able to install a “minimal” mate, but as I wasn’t involved in the process I really don’t know for sure).

    An oversight maybe. Assuming antergos/pluma is installed from Cnchi with the MATE DE, I can imagine the needed dependency slipping unnoticed since the DE is being installed anyways.

    A minimal MATE is a less likely explanation, since Pluma would require a fork in that case and substantial code alterations. The application really depends on mate-desktop which contains a large part of the MATE libraries Pluma makes use of (see: https://github.com/mate-desktop/pluma)

    @fernandomaroto, @karasu ,
    Would changing the repo order in pacman.conf and moving antergos to the bottom after the Arch repos have a significant impact on Antergos functionality? The reason an unqualified pluma installation isn’t pulling the dependencies is because the antergos repo is checked first. If Antergos doesn’t need this order, this would be a good way to avoid similar problems in the future.

    Another point that I must make here is that no antergos package should really be named the same as an Arch one. On this case, antergos/pluma should really have been named antergos/antergos-pluma or something like that. That alone eliminates any concerns about repo order.

  • @Krugar said in Bug with pacman?:

    An oversight maybe. Assuming antergos/pluma is installed from Cnchi with the MATE DE, I can imagine the needed dependency slipping unnoticed since the DE is being installed anyways.

    I’m sorry. As I didn’t do this so I really can’t say. I’m eager to add mate-desktop dependency, but let’s wait a little bit just in case @lots.0.logs says something.

    Would changing the repo order in pacman.conf and moving antergos to the bottom after the Arch repos have a significant impact on Antergos functionality? The reason an unqualified pluma installation isn’t pulling the dependencies is because the antergos repo is checked first. If Antergos doesn’t need this order, this would be a good way to avoid similar problems in the future.

    You can do that in your installation, of course. We need antergos repo first so we can force changes to “novice” users.

    Another point that I must make here is that no antergos package should really be named the same as an Arch one. On this case, antergos/pluma should really have been named antergos/antergos-pluma or something like that. That alone eliminates any concerns about repo order

    A bit of history here… Arch named pluma to the gtk2 package and pluma-gtk3 to the gtk3 package. At that time, we wanted to use the gtk3 packages, so it made sense to name them without the -gtk3 (in fact, that’s what Arch has ended doing).

    Package naming is a bit tricky… :grin:

    We won’t rename all mate packages! But maybe it’s time we stop packaging it as arch finally is packing the gtk3 version with “normal” names :smirk:

  • @karasu said in Bug with pacman?:

    We won’t rename all mate packages! But maybe it’s time we stop packaging it as arch finally is packing the gtk3 version with “normal” names

    would keepin it simpler ;)

    [updates once a week] = [90% less problems]
    [Li{u}n//u//{i}x] since 1988 - overcoming failure means success
    howto-install-antergos
    how to add system logs
    i3 GNOME

  • @karasu said in Bug with pacman?:

    A bit of history here… Arch named pluma to the gtk2 package and pluma-gtk3 to the gtk3 package. At that time, we wanted to use the gtk3 packages, so it made sense to name them without the -gtk3 (in fact, that’s what Arch has ended doing).
    Package naming is a bit tricky…

    LOL! I hear you :grin:

    So I’ll leave my suggestion: An antergos- prefix to solve all problems forever.
    I know, I know. You said you won’t be renaming all packages. I’m just pretending I can’t read ;)

  • ok, at least is a “pluma problem” not my .iso, pacman powerpill, pacaur heheheh
    I hope there aren’t other packages like that…

    Is arch updating mate for real now? (you started to pack at my request i think, long time ago :)) if so, i see no problem in not packing it anymore, except for the specific Antergos /config/icons/themes/wallpapers etc.

    Antergos (default OS) - WIN10 (abandoned)
    I3wm - Mate desktop
    AMD - A4 7300 Radeon graphics
    16 GB ram
    HD 1 TB
    Linux newbie since 06/2016

pacman80 Posts 15Views 259
Log in to reply