GNU bug report logs -
#62720
29.0.60; Not easy at all to upgrade :core packages like Eglot
Previous Next
Reported by: João Távora <joaotavora <at> gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2023 22:11:01 UTC
Severity: normal
Found in version 29.0.60
Done: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
Message #679 received at 62720 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On 22/04/2023 11:33, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2023 03:57:03 +0300
>> From: Dmitry Gutov<dmitry <at> gutov.dev>
>> Cc:jporterbugs <at> gmail.com,philipk <at> posteo.net,62720 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
>> joaotavora <at> gmail.com,larsi <at> gnus.org,monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca
>>
>>> That's what I imagined: adding a new optional argument to
>>> package--updateable-packages which would include builtins in the result.
>>>
>>> And only pass it when called from package-upgrade.
>>>
>>> Hopefully that's the kind of optional that you meant.
>> Here's a patch which does that. The diff could be reduced (the
>> package-update part) by binding the new option
>> (package-install-upgrade-built-in), but I figured it's better to avoid
>> interdependency while we're still deciding what to keep.
> Thanks, but this is not what was being discussed, AFAIU. What I said
> I'd agree to is to have package-update accept a prefix argument and
> heed package-install-upgrade-built-in (perhaps renamed),
I think I explained in the previous email why reusing
package-install-upgrade-built-in doesn't seem like a good idea.
> and only then
> update built-in packages.
I asked what plausible scenario you think might be broken by having
package-update upgrade builtin package by default.
Do you want to answer that?
> I also don't think I like the significant changes in package-update,
> nor understand why they are needed.
Like I said: the changes are to avoid relying on package-install being
able to install a package that's already installed. Which currently
works only for builtins and when only a user option is set. It's a mess.
And to "avoid interdependency".
Just to be clear, we are talking about the 4 lines at the end, right?
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 17 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.