GNU bug report logs -
#71356
use-package doesn't load org from elpa
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>> From: Andrea Corallo <acorallo <at> gnu.org>
>> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, paaguti <at> gmail.com, 71356 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 04:17:21 -0400
>>
>> Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net> writes:
>>
>> > Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>> >
>> >>> From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>
>> >>> Cc: Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez <paaguti <at> gmail.com>, acorallo <at> gnu.org,
>> >>> 71356 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> >>> Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2024 06:15:44 +0000
>> >>>
>> >>> Sorry for the delayed response; I don't think that has to be expected.
>> >>> While use-package can utilise package.el for package management, my
>> >>> impression is that it is at liberty to be more flexible/declarative.
>> >>
>> >> Doesn't use-package utilize package.el already?
>> >>
>> >> If not, how does it handle installation and upgrades? by its own code?
>> >
>> > By default it uses package.el, but there is an option to change it.
>> >
>> >>> > Do you have package-install-upgrade-built-in set non-nil? If not, can
>> >>> > you set it non-nil and try the recipe again?
>> >>>
>> >>> I have tried it out myself, and it doesn't appear to do anything. The
>> >>> issue looks like that `package-installed-p' doesn't respect
>> >>> package-install-upgrade-built-in or :pin.
>> >>
>> >> We should fix that, I think. If package-install-upgrade-built-in is
>> >> non-nil, use-package should upgrade built-in packages.
>> >>
>> >>> > As for a feature request: what exactly is the feature requested here?
>> >>> > Are you saying that use-package should automatically upgrade built-in
>> >>> > packages? If so, I don't think this will fly, since it would mean
>> >>> > inconsistencies with package-install.
>> >>>
>> >>> IIUC the feature would be that if a use-package form has a
>> >>>
>> >>> :pin gnu
>> >>>
>> >>> argument, then this is an indication that we want to install the package
>> >>> from GNU ELPA, disregarding the fact that Emacs already has a built-in
>> >>> version of the same package. Sort of a package-local version of
>> >>> `package-install-upgrade-built-in'.
>> >>
>> >> I'm not sure. People tend to copy/paste recipes from the Internet
>> >> without really understanding what they do. I think a simple :pin
>> >> should not be sufficient, we need some specialized keyword (in
>> >> addition to supporting package-install-upgrade-built-in).
>> >
>> > To me :pin would make perfect sense, as it explicitly expresses what
>> > archive we want to follow for package upgrades.
>>
>> +1, also use-package interface is very declarative and I'm not sure
>> having it influenced by a dynamic var would match user expected
>> behavior.
>
> If you prefer, we could add a new :foo keyword to mean this. But
> unconditionally changing what :pin means in these cases is out of the
> question.
We wouldn't change what :pin means directly, but just have
package-install respect `package-pinned-packages'. It seems that all we
have to change is this:
[Message part 2 (text/plain, inline)]
diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el
index fda855d2143..562dc5dbca3 100644
--- a/lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el
+++ b/lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el
@@ -2173,7 +2173,8 @@ package-installed-p
(version-list-<= min-version
(package-desc-version (car pkg-descs)))))
;; Also check built-in packages.
- (package-built-in-p package min-version)))))
+ (and (not (package-install-upgrade-built-in-p package))
+ (package-built-in-p package min-version))))))
(defun package-download-transaction (packages)
"Download and install all the packages in PACKAGES.
@@ -2197,6 +2198,11 @@ package-install-upgrade-built-in
:type 'boolean
:version "29.1")
+(defun package-install-upgrade-built-in-p (pkg)
+ "Return non-nil if PKG should be upgraded."
+ (or (assq pkg package-pinned-packages)
+ package-install-upgrade-built-in))
+
;;;###autoload
(defun package-install (pkg &optional dont-select)
"Install the package PKG.
@@ -2226,7 +2232,7 @@ package-install
(mapcan
(lambda (elt)
(and (or (and (or current-prefix-arg
- package-install-upgrade-built-in)
+ (package-install-upgrade-built-in-p elt))
(package--active-built-in-p (car elt)))
(not (package-installed-p (car elt))))
(list (symbol-name (car elt)))))
@@ -2241,7 +2247,7 @@ package-install
(unless (or dont-select (package--user-selected-p name))
(package--save-selected-packages
(cons name package-selected-packages)))
- (when (and (or current-prefix-arg package-install-upgrade-built-in)
+ (when (and (or current-prefix-arg (package-install-upgrade-built-in-p name))
(package--active-built-in-p pkg))
(setq pkg (or (cadr (assq name package-archive-contents)) pkg)))
(if-let* ((transaction
[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]
(not thoroughly tested, just a sketch that makes (use-package org
:ensure t :pin gnu) work)
--
Philip Kaludercic on peregrine
This bug report was last modified 167 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.