Re: Priority dependence
Bernhard R. Link writes ("Re: Priority dependence"):
> Calculating a dependency closure is neither an easy nor an task with
> a well-defined outcome. Starting with more data makes that both more
> easy and more likely to come to deterministic results (with a good
> enough starting set, most dependencies will most likely already be in
> that set, so the likelyhood to encounter virtual packages or or-ed
> dependencies (especially those were different packages have different
> first choices) is much smaller.
In theory since it does not normally make sense to simultaneously
install two different packages to do the same thing in the same way
(two implementations of the same interface), any dependency
ambiguities should be resolvable by reference to which of the multiple
possibilities are extra and which are optional. Only one should be
But we don't automatically check any of this so I guess it's unlikely
to be true.