Arch Linux User Repository

@bulletmark: There is no argument as I will not participate in one.

As far as what you know or don't know, I don't know anything other than what was in our conversation here.

If you want to feel insulted, I will let you do that by yourself. Peace, brother.

@yochananmarqos timeshift is a standard package. Of course it should not reference any package in the AUR. That argument is moot here because we are talking here about two equal peer packages in the AUR. Regarding your FYI, so even though I said I have been around here for years you suggest that I possibly did not know I can edit the wiki?! That's insulting! ;) Also, so even though you are saying I don't understand how conflicts is supposed to work you suggest I should edit the wiki about it?!

@bulletmark: Let me ask you this: Why can users install AUR packages that provide and conflict with repo packages with no issue? Example: Install timeshift-bin, then install timeshift from the repos. What happens? Does timeshift need specific conflicts? Of course not.

FYI, anyone can submit wiki article edits for review.

@yochananmarqos, it's one line in the PKGBUILD so could hardly be called "clutter" and it documents that there is another conflicting package so IS useful. Also, specifying conflicts protects my package against somebody (e.g. a new maintainer) deleting it in the other package. They are both peer AUR packages so both have equal claim to add that protection. I'll remove it if/when I am convinced it should be removed but I certainly am not convinced. Perhaps the wiki section about PKGBUILD conflicts should be clarified if there is something I am missing.

@bulletmark: The issue is, folks think it's needed when it's not. It accomplishes nothing, clutters the PKGBUILD and might make others think it's needed.

I'm a stubborn S.O.B. as well, so I understand being reluctant to let something go.

Remember, K.I.S.S. ;)

@yochananmarqos, xiota and you reference the same wiki which I have read plenty of times now and long ago. I will state the same question as I just said but more succinctly: I know that the conflicts here is not needed, but what problem/issue is there in adding it?

@bulletmark: First of all, I will say the provides and conflicts can be confusing. Honestly, it took me awhile to figure out.

Having said that, studying the PKGBUILD: Package relations wiki article and looking at Arch repo PKGBUILDs, I figured it out.

Imagine libinput-gestures was in the Arch extra repo. It would have no provides() or conflicts() arrays as there is nothing in the repos that would provide and conflict with it. The libinput-gestures-git package is already correct providing and conflicting with libinput-gestures. One can only have one of those packages installed at a time and will be prompted to replace one with the other installing either.

I hope that helped.

@yochananmarqos, of course I realize that there is no "need" to add the conflicts. However, as the maintainer of libinput-gestures I know it can not co-exist with that other package so what is wrong with specifying that conflicts explicitly? I consider it "documentation" within the PKGBUILD about that other package. I can't see any harm adding that explicitly and I don't see anything in the Arch docs prohibiting or recommending against it.

@bulletmark: libinput-gestures-git provides and conflicts with libinput-gestures. There's no need to add any conflicts here as packages already provide and conflict with themselves.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/PKGBUILD