From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com>
Subject: bug#22628: Emacs: ^ in installed package list misses some upgrades
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 13:40:53 +0300
Message-ID: <878u2qus7e.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <87r3gjvcgl.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48414)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1aUBAr-0002n5-J3
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 05:42:06 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1aUBAo-0003xz-Bw
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 05:42:05 -0500
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:56381)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1aUBAo-0003xp-80
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 05:42:02 -0500
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1aUBAo-0007oD-28
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 05:42:02 -0500
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.22628.B22628.145527366229943@debbugs.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <87r3gjvcgl.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic
	\=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\=
	\=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Thu, 11 Feb 2016 10:11:06 +0100")
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: 22628@debbugs.gnu.org

Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-02-11 12:11 +0300) wrote:

> Hello!
>
> In current Guix master we have Texinfo 6.0 and 6.1.  With 6.0 installed
> in my profile, hitting ^ in the M-x guix-installed-packages buffer does
> not mark Texinfo as a candidate for upgrade.

The fact that we have 2 versions is the answer.  In Emacs UI a package
is not considered to be obsolete if there is a package definition with
the same name+version.

That's why "texinfo 6.0" is green in the list, not red (as obsolete
packages).

I believe marking such packages as obsolete is not correct and it may be
confusing.  See <https://gnunet.org/bot/log/guix/2016-02-09#T909651>.

For example, if a user makes a package for some old version, (s)he wants
to use it and probably doesn't want it to be updated by accident
(because it is obsolete).

--=20
Alex