Copy that. Yes, I think we’ve found a bug. And unless I’m mistaken, the service files under /etc would normally simply be symlinks to the actual files under /usr. So there’s a discrepancy there as well.
1.) Like @andreas85 , you might not know one is installed (let alone exists) as was the case of it being pre-installed with the ISO.
2.) You don’t shift the burden to the user to research the source code / PKGBUILD of every package they wish to install. These packaging issues are the responsibility of the package maintainers; not the end-users.
conflicts= and provides= are defined in the PKGBUILD.
Quick fix would be to define, conflicts=kernel-modules-hook
Longterm fix would be what you described about the service/hook writing inside of /usr/.
Maybe instead of rsync’ing to /usr/lib/modules/.old/, it can rather use /var/linux-alive/.old/ as the folder? (For the other package that is, but it’s a moot point if kernel-alive works without issue, and rather re-locates the hidden .old file to /etc/ or elsewhere.)
Well I remember kernel-modules-hook was in the AUR too, so it must have slipped Manjaro, they should decide which one to keep, true.
I’m not sure if such a drastic reaction was needed without reading what @Ste74 had to say first, it’s not like the forum was flooded by angry users with a broken system it’s one report and not clear enough how to reproduce.
All those years I had no problem with it for example.
Can they? I’m not sure how Manjaro deals with Arch’s “Community” repo, in which many of those packages were promoted from the AUR previously. I assumed that Manjaro simply mirrors Arch’s Community repo.
Well ok, but if we look at it now from the new / inexperienced users perspective, them losing the prompt to reboot their system can lead to much much more complaints about a non-working system . At least that should be mentioned somewhere imo, though one could argument new users would use the Pamac Manager .
I’m trying to follow this thread after receiving the kernel-alive 0.5-2 update notice (core in my install ISO a few months ago) in pamac (curious what it was)… and am inclined to follow this advice…
Which I feel was also seconded…
However, I’m still wondering 2 things:
Does removing this package resolve the issue @andreas85 reported? Or is the bug still an issue, but more was learned about potentially having both kernel-alive and kernel-modules-hook installed (the later not installed on my system) simutaneously… and adding the conflict in today’s update is a step towards removing that scenario?
Would the only “change” I’d need to continue to keep in mind, if I remove the kernel-alive package, be to reboot after kernel updates; like I’m already doing? Or would I even experience any changes at all?
this kind of bug is what I hate most … only some users are affected and it is not so easily reproducible to be able to understand what is wrong … I quickly read the whole post … even for me it is not reproducible: since when I made the package I use it and I never found myself unable to start the system … a week ago I switched to btfrs from ext4 who knows … I created it or at least I looked for a way to prevent that annoyance that occurs when you have a pendrive you are using and you need and updating you are unable to use it or it disappears and you have to restart …