Bug#267619: marked as done (how to deal with a chain of dependencies)
Your message dated Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:24:46 -0500 (CDT)
with message-id <Pine.LNX.4.58.0408261424230.14238@gradall.private.brainfood.com>
and subject line Bug#267619: how to deal with a chain of dependencies
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Aug 2004 16:57:56 +0000
>From harald.dunkel@t-online.de Mon Aug 23 09:57:56 2004
Return-path: <harald.dunkel@t-online.de>
Received: from mailout05.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.82]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1BzI8p-0005mU-00; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 09:57:56 -0700
Received: from sfwd00.aul.t-online.de
by mailout05.sul.t-online.com with smtp
id 1BzI8o-0007e0-00; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:57:54 +0200
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (bddr1mZ1oej18kEpI8Dfpb7zzoI7ffefUxjfZmYdYtRGjGMAGniHEy@[80.146.121.96]) by sfwd00.sul.t-online.de
with esmtp id 1BzI8n-1SPVya0; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:57:53 +0200
Message-ID: <[🔎] 412A220F.8000807@t-online.de>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:57:51 +0200
From: "Harald Dunkel" <harald.dunkel@t-online.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040811 Debian/1.7.2-2
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: how to deal with a chain of dependencies
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ID: bddr1mZ1oej18kEpI8Dfpb7zzoI7ffefUxjfZmYdYtRGjGMAGniHEy
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_10,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.10.23
Severity: wishlist
Hi folks,
Would it be possible to extend the current binary dependency
scheme for packages by some kind of numeric dependency value?
Maybe a number for each missing dependent package describing
the probability to break this->package?
This would allow to set some kind of threshold for the
dependency evaluation, e.g. for a long chain of dependencies.
Regards
Harri
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 267619-done) by bugs.debian.org; 26 Aug 2004 19:24:47 +0000
>From doogie@debian.org Thu Aug 26 12:24:47 2004
Return-path: <doogie@debian.org>
Received: from brown.brainfood.com (gradall.private.brainfood.com) [146.82.138.61]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1C0Prb-0002VN-00; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 12:24:47 -0700
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] ident=adam)
by gradall.private.brainfood.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 1C0Prc-0003Sm-00; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:24:48 -0500
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:24:46 -0500 (CDT)
From: Adam Heath <doogie@debian.org>
X-X-Sender: adam@gradall.private.brainfood.com
To: Harald Dunkel <harald.dunkel@t-online.de>, 267619-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#267619: how to deal with a chain of dependencies
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] 412DA156.2040408@t-online.de>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0408261424230.14238@gradall.private.brainfood.com>
References: <[🔎] 412A220F.8000807@t-online.de>
<[🔎] Pine.LNX.4.58.0408251839340.14238@gradall.private.brainfood.com>
<[🔎] 412DA156.2040408@t-online.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Delivered-To: 267619-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Lets say the user wants to apt-get package "foo". Package
> "bar" is marked for install due to a long chain of dependencies
> for foo, e.g.
>
> package: foo --> d1 --> d2 --> d3 --> d4 --> d5 --> bar
>
> Today apt-get assumes that if d1 is missing, then foo
> will not work. This means the probability to break foo by
> not installing d1 is assumed to be 1.0. There is a
> similar relationship between all other packages and their
> next dependent package in this chain, i.e. the probability
> to break foo by not installing bar is assumed to be 1.0.
>
> If we extend the Depends: field in the package header by
> a numeric dependency value for each listed package, describing
> the probability to break the requested package if the
> dependent package is not installed, then the dependency chain
> of the example would look like this:
>
> package: foo --> d1 --> d2 --> d3 --> d4 --> d5 --> bar
> depvalue 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
>
> But if each package would list a more realistic depvalue
> for it dependencies, then the chain might look like
> this
>
> package: foo --> d1 --> d2 --> d3 --> d4 --> d5 --> bar
> depvalue 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.8
>
> If you multiply the numbers, then the probability to break foo
> if bar is missing is calculated to be 0.015. Lets assume the
> user has set a threshold for installing dependent packages
> to 0.02, so bar is not installed. d[1-5] are installed, because
> they are above threshold.
>
> Of course a missing package bar would break package (lets say)
> d4 with a probability of 0.24, which is much higher than the
> threshold. But please remember that the user has not requested
> d4 to be installed.
Ah, ok, you want to break dependencies.
Reply to: