aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* - 3.36Olivier Thauvin2010-07-233-1/+1246
|
* - fix deferencement on hash (instead hashref), warning triggered by perl 5.12Olivier Thauvin2010-07-231-1/+1
|
* only print debug message if debug callback is definedChristophe Fergeau2010-04-231-1/+1
|
* 3.353.35Christophe Fergeau2010-04-232-1/+3
|
* honour search medias when using --auto-selectChristophe Fergeau2010-04-232-1/+6
|
* 3.34.13.34.1Christophe Fergeau2010-03-232-1/+3
|
* check selected packages for unsatisfied requires when a promoted package is ↵Christophe Fergeau2010-03-232-0/+8
| | | | | | backtracked and no replacement is found (#57224, Anssi Hannula)
* 3.343.34Christophe Fergeau2010-03-232-1/+3
|
* adjust rpm.org/rpm5.org detection codeChristophe Fergeau2010-02-241-1/+1
| | | | | | It used to assume that rpm.org had version numbers < 4.7, but it's no longer true with rpm 4.8 being released. Test against 5.0 since rpm5.org releases started at 5.0
* check for conflicting selected packages before selecting a packageChristophe Fergeau2010-02-122-4/+8
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | check for conflicting selected packages before selecting a package instead of after selecting it, to avoid having to unselect package in case of conflict (which incorrectly unselected packages with unsatisfied dependencies as well, making the following backtrack_selected call behave wrongly as it simply noticed that the package is no longer required) Here's the second patch again, now with the function comment updated and added _remove_all_rejected_from() call so that prerejections are still cleared (this was previously called from the removed disable_selected() call). Testsuites pass. Patch by Anssi Hannula, fixes #57224
* 3.333.33Christophe Fergeau2009-10-052-2/+4
|
* Improve previous fixPascal Terjan2009-10-031-2/+2
|
* fix lookup of existing pubkeys (#53710)Pascal Terjan2009-10-032-2/+4
|
* update NEWS for 3.32Christophe Fergeau2009-08-101-0/+2
|
* 3.323.32Christophe Fergeau2009-08-101-1/+1
|
* comment out unused codeChristophe Fergeau2009-08-101-0/+2
|
* use set_rejected_and_compute_diff_provides for package removalChristophe Fergeau2009-08-102-10/+13
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Patch by Anssi Hannula, fixes bug #52667 k1-1 provides k, but not k1-2 l-1 and l-2 requires k m-1 requires k but not m-2 n requires m User has l-1, m-1, n-1, k1-1. There is only one upgrade path: k1-1 -> k1-2 m-1 -> m-2 removal of l-1 When transaction is created with all of them (e.g. what --auto-select does first), the path is resolved correctly. However, when the upgrade is triggered with the upgrade of k1, and l is in RPM db before n, resolving proceeds as follows: 1. k1 selected and old version rejected 2. l is promoted 3. m is promoted 4. l-2 is therefore selected 5. no packages are found for k (as k1-1 was rejected in step 1) 6. backtrack_selected calls resolve_rejected to reject the chain 7. rejection process rejects l, m, n 8. m-2 is selected because of step 3 End result: n is wrongly removed. Therefore, when using --auto-select (with --split-length 1 --split-level 1 in this small case, to force splitting) to trigger the upgrade, the early resolve is done correctly, but the first splitted transaction ("rpms sorted by dependencies" has k1 and m separately, so split is tried) tries to remove n and URPM fallbacks to single big transaction. In reverse, when using "urpmi k1" to trigger the upgrade, urpmi asks user confirmation for n removal, but the transaction is created with both k1 and m ("rpms sorted by dependencies" has k1+m, so they are put in same transaction), thus triggering the correct behaviour and n is not really removed after all, even if user agreed to it. Attached patch fixes this by switching backtrack_selected() to use set_rejected_and_compute_diff_provides() for package removal instead of resolve_rejected_(). The code already contained a comment indicating that diff_provides code should be applied. The patch introduces no regression in the urpmi and perl-URPM testsuites.
* Obey options (keep, nodeps) when unselecting current package in the caseAnssi Hannula2009-08-052-3/+6
| | | | | | that was added in 3.31 (Anssi Hannula). In a simple mistake, %options was not passed to backtrack_selected.
* remove extra newline from NEWSAnssi Hannula2009-08-051-1/+0
|
* remove no longer used SPEC_VERIFY constantPer Øyvind Karlsen2009-08-051-2/+0
|
* disttag & distepoch isn't utf8…Per Øyvind Karlsen2009-08-041-2/+2
|
* cast (es-s) to U32 (as the hv_fetch prototype expects) rather than casting ↵Per Øyvind Karlsen2009-08-041-1/+1
| | | | strlen(s) to signed
* 3.313.31Christophe Fergeau2009-07-281-1/+1
|
* we need to link with rpmbuild with rpm 4.6Christophe Fergeau2009-07-281-3/+3
|
* update NEWS fileChristophe Fergeau2009-07-281-0/+12
|
* add a backtrack entry "conflicts" for avoided packages in backtrack_selectedChristophe Fergeau2009-07-282-1/+8
| | | | Patch from Anssi Hannula, fixes part of bug #52153
* do not try to promote to an older packageChristophe Fergeau2009-07-281-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Patch by Anssi Hannula, fixes bug #52460 When searching for possible promotions, _handle_diff_provides() allows downgrade as well as upgrade. However, downgrade is not currently supported, and will fail early in _no_more_recent_installed_and_providing(), called from resolve_requested__no_suggests_(). As no backtracking is done for early failures in this function (should it be? dunno), the promotion gets forgotten and a failing transaction will occur. Simple fix is to only allow upgrade before doing the promotion. Patch attached. It introduces no regressions in urpmi or perl-URPM testsuite.
* unselect current package if an avoided package is already selectedChristophe Fergeau2009-07-281-3/+14
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Patch by Anssi Hannula, fixes bug #52145 If package 'a' Conflicts on 'b', and user (or a dependency chain) tries to install both at the same time, perl-URPM will only detect the conflict if package 'a' gets selected first (this depends on hdlist order), as _set_rejected_from is only called in one direction from _handle_conflicts and it does not detect that a package it is about to reject_from is already selected. This bug currently causes a failure in urpmi handle-conflict-deps2 testcase. This commit checks if avoided package is already selected, and unselects current package in such a case
* move part of _handle_conflicts to _handle_conflicts_with_selectedChristophe Fergeau2009-07-281-8/+17
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Patch by Anssi Hannula, first step toward fixing bug #52145 If package 'a' Conflicts on 'b', and user (or a dependency chain) tries to install both at the same time, perl-URPM will only detect the conflict if package 'a' gets selected first (this depends on hdlist order), as _set_rejected_from is only called in one direction from _handle_conflicts and it does not detect that a package it is about to reject_from is already selected. This patch moves part of _handle_conflicts to _handle_conflicts_with_selected to be called before dependencies get added, needed by next patch
* _handle_conflicts: check all provides for conflicts, not just package nameChristophe Fergeau2009-07-281-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Patch by Anssi Hannula, fixes bug #52135 If package a has "Conflicts: x" and b has "Provides: x", installing both at the same time creates a failing transaction (instead of producing the "cannot install a (or b), continue?") as perl-URPM does not detect the conflict, as it just checks the conflicts on the package name (it does the correct thing with installed packages, though). _handle_conflicts: call _set_rejected_from if any provides match the conflict, instead of just package name
* keep psel/promote info and remove deadlocked pkg instead of aborting upgradeChristophe Fergeau2009-07-281-3/+3
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Patch from Anssi Hannula, fixes bug #52105 lib64gcj9 has to be removed (conflicts), therefore so does libgcj9-src (x86_64) that depends on it. Installed java-1.5.0-gcj-src depends on libgcj9-src, so perl-URPM tries to promote the i586 libgcj9-src for it. However, strict_arch check prohibits changing the arch, so it falls back to backtracking. Backtracking finds libgcj9-src again and tries to select it; however, it drops $dep->{psel} and $dep->{promote}, so when it fails again, perl-URPM does not know java-1.5.0-gcj-src should also be removed due to the failed promotion. This patch changes the code in backtrack_selected in two ways: 1) When a replacement package is found, keep {promote} and {psel} info, so that when backtrack_selected is run the second time it correctly handles the failed promotion. 2) When such a replacement fails as well and the deadlock protection is triggered, do not switch to keep mode for the package that caused the promotion (it would unselect all the packages involved in the update that caused the promotion). Instead proceed to remove it as usual. The patch introduces no failures on the urpmi testsuite.
* keep track of sources for obsoleted/removed levelsChristophe Fergeau2009-07-282-3/+17
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Patch by Anssi Hannula, fixes bug #50666 removed/obsoleted levels are set in set_rejected() when a package is rejected (i.e. removed) or a rejection reason is added. They keep track on whether the package is removed and/or obsoleted. When the package has both flags and one of the rejection reasons is removed by _remove_rejected_from(), appropriate flags do not get removed. The case I encountered: the package is set for removal when a package it depends on fails upgrade due to unsatisfied dependency and has to be removed (backtrack_selected => resolve_rejected, causing removed=1), and the package is then promoted (causing obsoleted=1). However, the promotion fails due to the same unsatisfied dependency and backtrack_selected => disable_selected_and_unrequested_dependencies => disable_selected => _remove_all_rejected_from => _remove_rejected_from gets called. This removes the latter rejection reason, but leaves flags, including the now wrong obsoleted=1. Thus the package is not explicitely removed as an obsoletion is assumed, therefore failing the transaction.
* use pkg-config for rpm 4.x tooChristophe Fergeau2009-07-271-4/+1
|
* remove unused variableChristophe Fergeau2009-07-271-1/+0
|
* rephrase wording, only support for querying %disttag & %distepoch so far, no ↵Per Øyvind Karlsen2009-07-261-1/+1
| | | | | | | support for using %distepoch i version comparisions yet...
* add support for %disttag & %distepochPer Øyvind Karlsen2009-07-262-0/+19
|
* just use (void) rather than assign rpmtsFree() since it seems to cause ↵Per Øyvind Karlsen2009-07-261-15/+15
| | | | crashy behaviour certain places...
* bumping version was forgotten for 3.30 release, might as well bump it up toPer Øyvind Karlsen2009-07-261-1/+1
| | | | | 3.31 now for next release…
* update changelog regarding rpm5Per Øyvind Karlsen2009-07-261-0/+3
|
* oops, put back line that accidentally got removed in the previous commit…Per Øyvind Karlsen2009-07-261-0/+1
|
* enable and fix additional (-Wextra) warningsPer Øyvind Karlsen2009-07-262-14/+13
|
* fix gcc warnings about values not being usedPer Øyvind Karlsen2009-07-261-26/+26
|
* * clean out compatibility code for older rpm versions that's not reallyPer Øyvind Karlsen2009-07-262-104/+33
| | | | | | supported anymore anyways and move out as much as possible rpm5.org compatibility code out of URPM into new rpm46compat.h @ rpm5.org
* add support for specifying custom filter for compression with build_synthesis()Per Øyvind Karlsen2009-07-251-2/+4
|
* really clean up temporary files & directories properlyPer Øyvind Karlsen2009-07-222-8/+8
|
* prevent distepoch & disttag to be added and appended to package filenamePer Øyvind Karlsen2009-07-221-0/+5
|
* Removed forgotten debugging logsChristophe Fergeau2009-05-111-2/+0
|
* Add bug #Christophe Fergeau2009-05-111-1/+1
|
* Release 3.303.30topic/0.30Christophe Fergeau2009-05-111-0/+7
|
* Use key IDs to check if a key is already known or notChristophe Fergeau2009-05-111-73/+15
| | | | | | | | This has the side-effect that if we get a newer public key corresponding to an already known key id, it won't get updated, but for now RPM doesn't let us do that anyway. If a pubkey file contains multiple keys, we no longer handle this case, but I don't think this has been widely tested, if ever...
generated by cgit v1.2.1 (git 2.21.0) at 2024-11-12 03:38:43 +0000