Re: [Fwd: New approach to obsolete packages]

[Mitch Blevins <mblevin@debian.org>]

Andrea Mennucc1 wrote:
> hi

Hi yourself.

> Mitch Blevins wrote:
> > 
> > In foo.debian-devel, you wrote:
> > > We've had a number of cases now where it would be convenient to have a
> > > package that removes itself after successful installation. ...
> > > Self-Destruct: Yes
> > >
> > > This tells dpkg to automatically remove the package if nothing else
> > > depends on it.
> > > ...
> > 
> > Isn't this the same functionality provided by the propposed 'Auto'
> > flag in Deity? 
> 
> no it is completely different: consider the example:
> 1) the package   xbase   is obsolete : it does not really exist any
> more, 
>   debian  needs it there so that people will install, thru its
> dependencies,
>   all new x* packages
> 2) if I install moonlight that needs   mesa2g  , then I will also
> install
>  mesa2g to use it, but I would love that if I later remove  moonlight,
>  mesa2g would be removed, too
> 
> if you where using APT, the package  xbase would most probably have
> been installed BY DIRECT CHOICE of the user, and then it wouldnt not
> have the "auto" flag setted: APT would NEVER delete it using the "Auto" 
> flag
> 
> for the first case , you need an "Obsolete" flag
> for the second, you need a "Auto" flag

I see...  since they don't serve the same function, then it would be
okay to have both an Auto flag and a Self-Destruct flag?

> > From Section 5.2 of
> > http://www.debian.org/~wakkerma/apt-design2.1.txt
> > 
> > 5.2 Automatically installed packages ......
> 
> 
> Hey I love this ! I wanted to propose it to the debian community myself!
> 
> I would also add another use of this flag!
> We could permit people to grade packages by their usage:
> when the user selects a package, it coul optionally say ``why''
> 
> So my idea is to replace the "Auto" flag by a field called
> "Reason-of-installation" which has  two usages:
> basic usage: it can have two values 
>  "to-satisfy-dependeces" and "for-user-choice",
>   which APT will set 
> advanced usage: it can have other values, at user discretion: eg 
>  "for-testin" "for-entertainment"  "for-work" ecc
> 
> Why ? well it happens that I install packages "only-for-testing";
> then , I run out of disk space, and I have to reread all the list
> of 1000s of installed packages to see which one I better delete;
> with the above flag, I could ask it to APT

Interesting.

> > The advantage of your proposed Self-Destruct field over the Auto flag is:
> > It takes the decision out of the hands of the end-user.
> > The disadvantage of the Self-Destruct field is:
> > It takes the decision out of the hands of the end-user.
> 
> well, IMHO the decision of removing an obsolete package should be
> proposed anyway to the  ordinary end user, somehow

I think that I agree with you on that now.

-Mitch