Hi Erik,

Thanks for your input, especially the part about update.sh and checking about the name change related to already installed situation. I hadn't thought about that, so that is a good reminder to me.

Regards,

Adolf.


On 27/11/2020 17:39, ummeegge wrote:
> Hi Adolf,
> 
> Am Donnerstag, den 26.11.2020, 23:22 +0100 schrieb Adolf Belka:
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I have been working on a solution for bug 12539.
>>
>> With cups and cups-filters installed the services tab shows cups
>> twice in the add-on list. This is because the cut command from the
>> installed meta files causes both meta-cups and meta-cups-filters to
>> result in cups and therefore shows up twice.
>>
>> The solution seems to be to rename the Prog name from cups-filters to
>> cups_filters. I made these changes in my local repo and everything
>> built successfully.
>>
>> However I can not figure out how to test and confirm that it has
>> worked.
>> If I install the built ISO and then install cups and cups_filters
>> from pakfire they load the programs from the IPFire repo and
>> therefore load the original versions which still have the problem and
>> show up twice in the services tab.
> I think you can not use Pakfire for this.
> 
>>
>> If I copy the cup and cups_filters ipfire packages and install them
>> into my test bed system, the programs are installed and can be
>> successfully started but because they were not installed by pakfire
>> they have not been added to the installed meta files in
>> /opt/pakfire/db/installed/meta-* and therefore do not show up in the
>> services tab at all.
> You can generate a file via
> touch /opt/pakfire/db/installed/meta-cups_filters
> without PGP Signature, Name etc. but it should display it in the status
> section.
> 
> But for an IPFire update i see a problem for the installed packages
> since simply the name of the package has changed a '-' ≠ '_' and
> therefor the name has been changed and will be handled like another
> package -->
> https://git.ipfire.org/?p=ipfire-2.x.git;a=blob;f=src/pakfire/lib/functions.pl;hb=31cbb589d9c8610ba0d9b15e2cb1612ac05912a6#l647
> . In my opinion, there should be a check in update.sh if the package is
> present, the meta file name needs to be changed then, otherwise updates
> etc. are not possible.
> 
> 
> Can anyone help me with advice on how to be able to install these
> modified add-on packages so I can check that the original problem is
> actually solved by my solution, or do I have to just submit a patch and
> the review of the patch will tell me if I have done it correctly or
> not.
> 
> Thanks for any help/advice,
> 
> Just my two cents on that, hope it helps :-) .
> 
> 
> Adolf
> 
> 
> Best,
> 
> Erik
>