[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#16994: 24.3; package.el dependency ordering incorrect (non-topologic
bug#16994: 24.3; package.el dependency ordering incorrect (non-topological)
Tue, 06 May 2014 14:13:45 -0400
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux)
> package.el does not resolve dependencies in the correct order,
> potentially resulting in packages installed before their
> dependencies. This was reported in #14082 , but not fixed for all
> cases. The packages should be arranged in topological order before
Indeed, thanks. I installed the patch below which should make the sort
truly topological. It also adds detection of dependency cycles since
this new topological sorting would otherwise get into an inf-loop
in that case.
=== modified file 'lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el'
--- lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el 2014-03-28 22:47:46 +0000
+++ lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el 2014-05-06 18:07:45 +0000
@@ -868,7 +868,7 @@
;; Also check built-in packages.
(package-built-in-p package min-version)))
-(defun package-compute-transaction (packages requirements)
+(defun package-compute-transaction (packages requirements &optional seen)
"Return a list of packages to be installed, including PACKAGES.
PACKAGES should be a list of `package-desc'.
@@ -880,7 +880,9 @@
This function recursively computes the requirements of the
packages in REQUIREMENTS, and returns a list of all the packages
that must be installed. Packages that are already installed are
-not included in this list."
+not included in this list.
+SEEN is used internally to detect infinite recursion."
;; FIXME: We really should use backtracking to explore the whole
;; search space (e.g. if foo require bar-1.3, and bar-1.4 requires toto-1.1
;; whereas bar-1.3 requires toto-1.0 and the user has put a hold on toto-1.0:
@@ -893,15 +895,22 @@
(dolist (pkg packages)
(if (eq next-pkg (package-desc-name pkg))
(setq already pkg)))
+ (when already
(if (version-list-<= next-version (package-desc-version already))
- ;; Move to front, so it gets installed early enough (bug#14082).
- (setq packages (cons already (delq already packages)))
+ ;; `next-pkg' is already in `packages', but its position there
+ ;; means it might be installed too late: remove it from there, so
+ ;; we re-add it (along with its dependencies) at an earlier place
+ ;; below (bug#16994).
+ (if (memq already seen) ;Avoid inf-loop on dependency cycles.
+ (message "Dependency cycle going through %S"
+ (package-desc-full-name already))
+ (setq packages (delq already packages))
+ (setq already nil))
(error "Need package `%s-%s', but only %s is being installed"
next-pkg (package-version-join next-version)
(package-version-join (package-desc-version already)))))
+ (already nil)
((package-installed-p next-pkg next-version) nil)
@@ -933,12 +942,13 @@
(t (setq found pkg-desc)))))
- (error problem)
+ (error "%s" problem)
(error "Package `%s-%s' is unavailable"
next-pkg (package-version-join next-version))))
(package-compute-transaction (cons found packages)
- (package-desc-reqs found))))))))
+ (package-desc-reqs found)
+ (cons found seen))))))))
(defun package-read-from-string (str)
|[Prev in Thread]
||[Next in Thread]|
- bug#16994: 24.3; package.el dependency ordering incorrect (non-topological),
Stefan Monnier <=