SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Back when I decided to "maintain" slackpkg, I tried to make it clear that the goal was a *true* "maintenance mode," i.e. new features are generally not desirable. However, enhancement and fixing of existing functionality *is* desirable. With that said, I'd like to get some testing of a 2.84.0_beta1 release. From the ChangeLog:
Code:
Sun Dec 2 06:46:33 UTC 2018
---------------
- 2.84.0_beta1
- Allow blacklisting of individual packages without collateral
damage (e.g. glibc ---> glibc-*). This changes the prior behavior
of the blacklist function; previously, adding "glibc" to the
blacklist would cause glibc, glibc-profile, glibc-zoneinfo, et al
to be ignored by slackpkg. The new behavior is that *only* the
glibc package is ignored. If you want to blacklist all packages
whose names begin with glibc, you would need to add "glibc.*" to
the blacklist now. Also note that any special characters, e.g. "+",
will need to be escaped in the blacklist file. (David Woodfall)
- Add support for listing .new files without PAGER (David Woodfall)
- Remove switch.ch mirrors
- Add config option to allow *not* saving .orig configs (Darren Austin)
- Mention possible stale mirror if CHECKSUMS.md5 gpg verify fails
- Clarify that a press of "Enter" is needed to confirm kernel change
(Mario Preksavec)
- doinst.sh Don't remove ChangeLog.txt upon upgrade/reinstall.
(Patrick Volkerding)
- mirrors-x86*.sample: Remove bjtu.edu.cn mirror
- Fix for /var/log/packages/ possibly being a symlink to elsewhere
- Use CHECKSUMS.md5.asc to determine ChangeLog newness
(Patrick Volkerding)
I'm pretty sure this is going to change the blacklist behavior slightly by fixing what was (in my opinion) a bug, and I know that there are probably people who depended on that bug being present [1], but I'm hoping to see how prevalent that is and how much of a dealbreaker it actually is from users.
Be sure to move/merge config files in /etc/slackpkg/ *and* you'll want to (temporarily) add slackpkg to the blacklist so that you don't immediately go back to the stock version the first time you use it :-)
Distribution: Slackware64 15.0 (started with 13.37). Testing -current in a spare partition.
Posts: 928
Rep:
I installed this new version in a Slackware-current pure alsa install.
It seems that it is running ok. There is a new update in -current today Dec 3,
but the mirror I use didn't sync yet, a few more hours and I can run the new
slackpkg with updates to process.
One thing that I noted, slackpkg+ is installed as well but it seems that
the new slackpkg version doesn't work well with slackpkg+.
I blacklisted slackpkg and sbopkg and, with slackpkg+ installed, they
still appear in the 'upgrade-all' (slackpkg) and 'clean-system' (sbopkg).
Then I uninstalled slackpkg+ and this time blacklist is honored (and the
pulseaudio packages appear as upgrades to the pure alsa ones).
It looks like slackpkg+ does it's own parsing of the
blacklist file.
With slackpkg+ installed, blacklisting [0-9]+_SBo still
lists all the SBo packages for removal with clean-system.
As soon as I removed slackpkg+ they weren't listed.
I haven't looked (and probably won't look) at slackpkg+, but it seems like the best solution would be for it to use the stock slackpkg functions except when it can't. Either way, I'm not going to intentionally break slackpkg+ or any other third-party addon for slackpkg, but I'm also not going change an implementation of something in slackpkg for the sake of slackpkg+.
found changelog
made this tool help me see the direction and show your hard work thank you. https://github.com/Drakeo/slackpkg-beta
shows your history from 2007 on.
Last edited by Drakeo; 12-31-2018 at 10:31 AM.
Reason: shows your history from 2007 on.
slackpkg+-1.7.0-noarch-10mt.txz and slackpkg+-1.7.0d1-noarch-6mt.txz now allow to use new blacklist system, but only for install/upgrade/remove options (not search) and not for greylist.
Distribution: Slackware64 15.0 (started with 13.37). Testing -current in a spare partition.
Posts: 928
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerouno
slackpkg+-1.7.0-noarch-10mt.txz and slackpkg+-1.7.0d1-noarch-6mt.txz now allow to use new blacklist system, but only for install/upgrade/remove options (not search) and not for greylist.
Which one can be tested with the slackpkg beta?
I have installed slackpkg+-1.7.0-noarch-9mt then should I download the 10mt?
I'm testing this on a separated partition so there is no danger on breaking things.
EDIT- The package slackpkg+-1.7.0-noarch-10mt.txz is the stable release,
and slackpkg+-1.7.0d1-noarch-6mt.txz is from development branch.
I installed slackpkg+-1.7.0-noarch-10mt.txz and is working ok
with slackpkg-2.84.0_beta3-noarch-1_rlw.txz.
blacklist now works, adding 'slackpkg' to it and running 'slackpkg upgrade-all'
doesn't show the Slackware package to upgrade.
greylist now works too, adding 'sbopkg' to it and running 'slackpkg clean-system'
shows the package unselected. (sbopkg isn't in the blacklist)
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.