bug#72141: 29.4; package-upgrade vs package-load-list

[Philip Kaludercic]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Thierry Volpiatto <thievol@posteo.net>
>> Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 14:46:37 +0000
>> 
>> 
>> I think there is a bug here, but please verify with following recipe as
>> I don't use widely package installation, at least for myself.  When reading
>> the code I believe it is reproductible as well on emacs-30+.
>> 
>> 1) Install package foo and bar.
>> 2) Disable them in package-load-list ((foo nil) (bar nil) all).
>> 3) Wait some time until foo and/or bar have new versions available.
>> 4) Call package-upgrade-all.  It will call package-upgrade on foo
>> and bar (and possibly others).  When package-upgrade find foo
>> package it will (1) delete it and (2) call package-install which
>> will refuse to install (error) because foo is disabled.
>> 
>> As a result we have lost foo package, it is now uninstalled.
>> Same problem with M-x package-upgrade, foo and bar are listed in
>> completion and made available whereas they are going to fail to
>> upgrade.
>
> Philip, any comments or suggestions?

The issue is that we don't install a package if it is disabled.  So
either we allow installing (but don't activate) disabled packages, or we
ignore disabled packages during upgrades.  That might just need this
change:

diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el
index 7cae8d68bc0..eb77d99fad2 100644
--- a/lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el
+++ b/lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el
@@ -2286,6 +2286,9 @@ package--upgradeable-packages
       (or (let ((available
                  (assq (car elt) package-archive-contents)))
             (and available
+                 (package-disabled-p
+                  (cadr elt)
+                  (package-desc-version (cadr elt)))
                  (or (and
                       include-builtins
                       (not (package-desc-version (cadr elt))))

-- 
        Philip Kaludercic on peregrine