Re: WARNING! New Perl/Perl-base upgrade removes 141 Sid/Unstable packages
On 2016-09-29 13:28:48 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2016-09-29 10:17:57 +0100, Darac Marjal wrote:
> > But what if PackageA is something like libc? A hundred packages are to be
> > upgraded but PackageB is old and incompatible. Clearly, even though you've
> > boosted the cost of removals, it's STILL cheaper to remove PackageB than it
> > is to cancel those hundred installs.
>
> Wrong. I've said "removals" in SolutionCost. So, 1 removal is cheaper
> than *any* number of canceled actions. If I wanted some compromise
> between removals and canceled actions, I would have put something
> like: removals + 100 * canceled-actions.
I meant: 100 * removals + canceled-actions
(i.e. 1 remove has the same cost of 100 canceled actions).
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
Reply to: