| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Move the test suite to test/pacman in order to make a logical
location for a future makepkg test suite.
Signed-off-by: Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org>
Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dan@archlinux.org>
|
|
The main reason for this change is that scripts could not catch the removed
targets with -S --noconfirm (the return value was 0). So the effect of a
pacman command may have differed from the expected one. Moreover, for my
taste the default no answer is better (I wanted to install the specified
targets, not a subset of them).
I had to change some pactest files as well, because now the default behavior
is not to remove unresolvable targets. In fact, the only pactest file that
tested this feature was ignore005.py.
Signed-off-by: Nagy Gabor <ngaba@bibl.u-szeged.hu>
Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dan@archlinux.org>
|
|
Enabled a new prompt to ask the user if they'd like to remove
unresolvable packages from the transaction rather than failing it.
Many pactest tests that used to fail now return success codes, because
pacman now issues a prompt allowing the user to cancel rather than
failing many transactions, and the pactest scripts always choose to
cancel with no error rather than failing. The only net effect is that
the return status of pacman is now 0 in cases where it used to be
nonzero.
Signed-off-by: Bryan Ischo <bryan@ischo.com>
Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dan@archlinux.org>
|
|
This patch should avoid duplicated target names in the backend.
1. sync_loadtarget will return with PM_ERR_TRANS_DUP_TARGET when trying to
add a duplicated target
2. sysupgrade never pulls duplicated targets
3. resolvedeps won't pull duplicated targets anymore
A pulled list was introduced in sync_prepare to improve the
pmsyncpkg_t<->pmpkg_t list conversion by making it more direct.
Also replace sync1005 and sync1006 by the sync1008 pactest, which is
similar but more interesting (the provisions are dependencies instead of
explicit targets).
sync1005 didn't work as expected anyway. It was expecting that pacman
failed, and pacman indeed failed, but not for the good reason. It didn't
fail during the preparation step because of conflicting targets, but during
the commit step, because of a md5 error...
And sync1006 didn't pass and was not really worth fixing. We have already
enough failing pactests more important than these two.
sync1008 pass with this patch.
Signed-off-by: Nagy Gabor <ngaba@bibl.u-szeged.hu>
Signed-off-by: Chantry Xavier <shiningxc@gmail.com>
|
