GNU bug report logs - #72141
29.4; package-upgrade vs package-load-list

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Thierry Volpiatto <thievol <at> posteo.net>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: thievol <at> posteo.net, Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>, 72141 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#72141: 29.4; package-upgrade vs package-load-list
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2024 12:39:51 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>
>> Cc: Thierry Volpiatto <thievol <at> posteo.net>,  72141 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2024 11:47:44 +0000
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> >> From: Thierry Volpiatto <thievol <at> posteo.net>
>> >> Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 14:46:37 +0000
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> I think there is a bug here, but please verify with following recipe as
>> >> I don't use widely package installation, at least for myself.  When reading
>> >> the code I believe it is reproductible as well on emacs-30+.
>> >> 
>> >> 1) Install package foo and bar.
>> >> 2) Disable them in package-load-list ((foo nil) (bar nil) all).
>> >> 3) Wait some time until foo and/or bar have new versions available.
>> >> 4) Call package-upgrade-all.  It will call package-upgrade on foo
>> >> and bar (and possibly others).  When package-upgrade find foo
>> >> package it will (1) delete it and (2) call package-install which
>> >> will refuse to install (error) because foo is disabled.
>> >> 
>> >> As a result we have lost foo package, it is now uninstalled.
>> >> Same problem with M-x package-upgrade, foo and bar are listed in
>> >> completion and made available whereas they are going to fail to
>> >> upgrade.
>> >
>> > Philip, any comments or suggestions?
>> 
>> The issue is that we don't install a package if it is disabled.  So
>> either we allow installing (but don't activate) disabled packages, or we
>> ignore disabled packages during upgrades.
>
> The latter, I'd say.  It makes little sense to upgrade disabled
> packages.

When I posted initially this bugreport I wrote this (fully not tested):

    (defun package--upgradeable-packages (&optional include-builtins filter-load-list)
      ;; Initialize the package system to get the list of package
      ;; symbols for completion.
      (package--archives-initialize)
      (let ((pkgs (if include-builtins
                      (append package-alist
                              (mapcan
                               (lambda (elt)
                                 (when (not (assq (car elt) package-alist))
                                   (list (list (car elt) (package--from-builtin elt)))))
                               package--builtins))
                    package-alist))) 
        (cl-loop for (sym desc) in pkgs
                 for available = (assq sym package-archive-contents)
                 when (or (and available
                               (or (and
                                    include-builtins
                                    (not (package-desc-version desc)))
                                   (version-list-<
                                    (package-desc-version desc)
                                    (package-desc-version (cadr available)))
                                   (and filter-load-list
                                        (pcase (assq p package-load-list)
                                          (`(,sym ,val) (or (not (eq val nil))
                                                            (not (stringp val))))))))
                          (package-vc-p desc))
                 collect sym)))

Perhaps package-disabled-p can be used instead of the pcase (I didn't
know its existence).

-- 
Thierry

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.