Re: no wonder...
On 4/7/2000, 10:56:59 PM, "loki" <eloki@dingoblue.net.au> wrote regarding
Re: no wonder...:
> On Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 08:48:18AM +0700, Oki DZ wrote:
> > On Fri, 7 Apr 2000, Richard Taylor wrote:
> > > My mileage varies. I find that the program simplifies what can be a
> > > vastly more difficult process... that of tracking dependencies, versions,
> > > file locations, etc, etc... It does it
> > > fairly well and it does it accurately.
> Which doesn't explain why there is a project to create a better
top-level
> package management tool called "apt"? :)
No, it doesn't. Dselect works with apt as far as I know. Nothing's so
perfect it can't be improved.
> > I think the problem in dselect that it doesn't show the dependency tree.
> > The listing of the packages is useful, of course, but it's just a list.
> Agreed; it's a plain list, which can be viewed in various ways. What I
> think would be better would be the ability to collapse parts of the list
> that you're not viewing, like a directory tree.
That would be a help as well as filters...
> Then you come to the actual conflict resolution part. Possibly it'd be
> great if it could detect these conflicts in real-time (I guess this might
> not be trivial or speedy to implement), and prompt you.
> For example, you select a package and it pops up saying "This package
also
> requires: foo bar baz wibble snafu... do you wish to install them as well
or
> cancel installation of xyz?" This lets you select/cancel the whole
operation
> (and it is one operation really, after all.. people just say "grr.. need
> that as well.. alright" so it's not really an independent choice anyway.)
> For conflicts, "This package conflicts with the following: foo baz. Do
you
> wish to proceed (removing those packages), or cancel this install? [y/n]"
Ummm... how does your dselect work? Mine does pretty much what you've
described above.
> Recommendations and suggestions are a little more difficult (since it's
> something people are more likely to pick and choose over) but still quite
> doable and could be simpler IMO.
Also already implemented.
Reply to: