Search Criteria
Package Details: downgrade 11.4.2-1
Package Actions
| Git Clone URL: | https://aur.archlinux.org/downgrade.git (read-only, click to copy) |
|---|---|
| Package Base: | downgrade |
| Description: | Bash script for downgrading one or more packages to a version in your cache or the A.L.A. |
| Upstream URL: | https://github.com/archlinux-downgrade/downgrade |
| Licenses: | GPL |
| Submitter: | brisbin33 |
| Maintainer: | brisbin33 (atreyasha) |
| Last Packager: | brisbin33 |
| Votes: | 796 |
| Popularity: | 9.25 |
| First Submitted: | 2009-11-12 01:48 (UTC) |
| Last Updated: | 2024-10-22 16:48 (UTC) |
Dependencies (3)
- fzf (fzf-gitAUR, skim-fzf-dropinAUR)
- pacman-contrib (pacman-contrib-gitAUR)
- sudo (fake-sudoAUR, polkit-fakesudoAUR, sudo-gitAUR, doas-sudo-shimAUR, doas-sudo-shim-minimalAUR, sudo-hgAUR, sudo-selinuxAUR, fudo-gitAUR) (optional) – for installation via sudo
Required by (1)
- arch-os-manager (optional)
Latest Comments
« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 .. 13 Next › Last »
brisbin33 commented on 2023-10-17 12:39 (UTC)
Thanks rwd2, it seems like the packaging issue here:
It's expecting a variable here to contain the executable names to install, but it's empty so it does nothing. I've opened an issue: https://github.com/archlinux-downgrade/downgrade/issues/220
rwd2 commented on 2023-10-17 12:29 (UTC)
Today I installed 11.3.0-1, but pacman -l shows the package is missing the executable. See build log and output of pacman -l here:
https://pastebin.com/DETBtY9r
brisbin33 commented on 2022-03-02 13:41 (UTC)
Yup, I've reported the Issue here. Please follow if you would like to know when it's fixed.
Archanfel80HUN commented on 2022-03-02 12:47 (UTC)
The x86-64-v3 level enables AVX, AVX2, BMI2, MOVBE, XSAVE, and other instructions found on Intel and AMD processors of the past several years. Its basically packages builds optimized for newer processors, instead of the generic one which is for compatibility. Using v3 builds could provide 5-10% percformance gain especially in kernels and dkms modules.
Archanfel80HUN commented on 2022-03-02 11:53 (UTC)
@brisbin33: yes, print only the firt result should work: $(pacman-conf Architecture | grep -m1 '')
or maybe a nicer alternative, but something like this :)
brisbin33 commented on 2022-03-02 11:48 (UTC)
Oh, sorry about that. I saw
Unable to downgrade mc+ echoin that log.Indeed! Good catch,
That's what we used to do, but there are reasons it doesn't work in other cases.
I don't know the purpose of this, or how downgrade should behave in such a case, but would taking the first result (
x86_64) always be the most correct thing we can do? That's an easy fix.Archanfel80HUN commented on 2022-03-01 23:08 (UTC) (edited on 2022-03-01 23:10 (UTC) by Archanfel80HUN)
Or maybe this: instead of "pacman-conf Architecture" use "uname -m". The second one only shows system arch, not shown the custom arch's. It did show only x86_64 correctly for me.
P
Archanfel80HUN commented on 2022-03-01 23:02 (UTC)
Find the issue: @@ -462,13 +462,13 @@ # Set script defaults PACMAN="pacman" PACMAN_CONF="/etc/pacman.conf" -DOWNGRADE_ARCH="x86_64" +DOWNGRADE_ARCH="$(pacman-conf Architecture)" DOWNGRADE_ALA_URL="https://archive.archlinux.org" DOWNGRADE_FROM_ALA=1 DOWNGRADE_FROM_CACHE=1 DOWNGRADE_MAXDEPTH=1 DOWNGRADE_CONF="/etc/xdg/downgrade/downgrade.conf" -DOWNGRADE_VERSION="10.1.0" +DOWNGRADE_VERSION="10.1.1"
# Main code execution if ((!LIB)); then
This command 'pacman-conf Architecture' results with two option in my system: "x86_64 x86_64_v3" because i have repo's with different arch. This not handled well i think.
Workaround is change the DOWNGRADE ARCH to static "x86_64" and its works.
P
Archanfel80HUN commented on 2022-03-01 22:50 (UTC)
@brisbin33 there was no + in the package name. its the 'mc'. i pick a simple one. It didnt work neither.
brisbin33 commented on 2022-02-28 16:31 (UTC)
Thanks, the + in the package name is confusing it. Please report it on GitHub, otherwise I can, but it may take me a little while to get to it.
« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 .. 13 Next › Last »