On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 11:24:57AM +0200, Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It sounds like you're saying I shouldn't display the state of the > > program before resolving dependencies? Wouldn't that be horribly > > confusing if some of the automatically installed packages had dependency > > errors? "huh? Why do I care that libherring43 had dependency problems? > > I didn't ask you to install that!" > > Yes, that would be confusing, too. The "standard resolver" output you > posted in an other mail would be clearer. > > And in my case, it would have been good to indicate that, as a side > effect of holding back A, B and C, also the 70 other packages which were > displayed as "NEW packages are going to be installed" will be "kept at > their current version: (none)".
OK, I'm completely lost in this discussion. I need to get my bearings again. :-) I believe that we agree that the autoinstalls which aptitude does before displaying a prompt should be explicitly output in dependency order, or at least you should be able to get that information from the prompt. So you get something like: Automatically resolving dependencies... wesnoth Depends wesnoth-data ... Continue? [Y/n] I like this idea, although for very large installs, like the one that started this bug, I wonder if this would be counterproductive. The information that I really need to produce this output is tied up in apt right now, unfortunately. > Something like > > Resolving dependencies... > The following actions will resolve these dependencies: > > Keep the following packages at their current version: > apt [0.6.46.4-0.1 (now)] > apt-utils [0.6.46.4-0.1 (now)] > libsasl2-2 [2.1.22.dfsg1-10 (now)] > python-apt [0.6.21 (now)] > + > + Do not install NEW depended-on or recommended packages: > + libbla, libfasel, libblubber, pciutils, pci-inutils, ... > > Score is -30 Here, are you referring to the fact that aptitude cancels installations that are no longer necessary after dependencies are resolved? I think that's what you're saying, and yeah, I think it would be good if aptitude could detect which packages would be kicked out by the autoremoval after applying a solution. This will be somewhat difficult to do with the new apt logic, though. If I had the option of refactoring it a little, I could add appropriate hooks, though... I'm sorry if I'm really out in left field here or not following your messages. I feel like I'm missing out on an important point -- could you maybe try pounding it into my head again? :) Daniel
