From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Forcing reinstall in package.el Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 09:42:23 -0600 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <87oc8jdr4w.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <87sjy03uyw.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87y67rytjc.fsf@lifelogs.com> <871v5g4fr8.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1292686961 13584 80.91.229.12 (18 Dec 2010 15:42:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 15:42:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Tom Tromey Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 18 16:42:37 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PTyvd-0002y6-1c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 18 Dec 2010 16:42:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44867 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PTyvc-0007BJ-18 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 18 Dec 2010 10:42:36 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55426 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PTyvU-00079z-59 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Dec 2010 10:42:29 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PTyvS-00037h-W2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Dec 2010 10:42:28 -0500 Original-Received: from blockstar.com ([208.100.47.114]:53878 helo=mail.blockstar.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PTyvS-00036x-Qp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Dec 2010 10:42:26 -0500 Original-Received: from heechee (c-67-186-102-106.hsd1.il.comcast.net [67.186.102.106]) by mail.blockstar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 971863E1A2B; Sat, 18 Dec 2010 09:42:28 -0600 (CST) X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" In-Reply-To: (Tom Tromey's message of "Fri, 17 Dec 2010 08:56:10 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:133790 Archived-At: On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 08:56:10 -0700 Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Ted" == Ted Zlatanov writes: Ted> "You have %s version %s installed, are you sure you want the older version %s? (y/n/Y/N) " Tom> I forgot to mention -- installing older versions can break dependencies. Tom> The package activation code will handle this ok (it will not activate Tom> such packages), but it will probably come as a surprise to the user when Tom> some other package stops working. Does this mean you're OK with the prompts otherwise? I think if the user asks to install an older version and forces package.el to do it, they should be responsible for any breakage. The prompt is too long already so I don't want to extend it with "...and this will break installed packages if they depend on the newer version." But maybe package.el could show "broken" packages that can't be activated because of the version mismatch? Or is that already covered? Ted