Re: Auto install code
On Fri, 16 Jan 1998, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> > Personally, I would have it such that the user never sees the libc6
> > package in the selection list except as a dependency of something else.
>
> I can arrange for auto packages to be hidden unless a list menu option is
> selected if you like?
Sorry. I wasn't clear. I meant that I would hope that people had their
keywords set such that (most) dependent packages (like libraries) weren't
in the selection list. If the user has the keyword "library" on for the
selection list, then libc6 should be shown. But personally, I would never
do that. Is that clearer?
> > I guess I imagined that libc6 would be installed automatically the first
> > time that someone upgraded a package that dependended on libc6.
>
> It is. But the user has to explicly ask that a package depending on libc6
> be upgraded. The autoupgrader will not install new packages to try to make
> other packages upgradable. If you want this then please tell me :>
I see. Yes, the way you have it now is a Good Thing(tm). Again, this
is a case I didn't think of.
> We could redo the example and have the user upgrade MyPackage (instead of
> installing libc6) which would cause libc6 to be installed and then have
> the user undo their action and notice that libc6 was not automatically
> removed.
>
> You might think the auto mechanism would deal with this, but what happens
> is that once libc6 is installed many other packages suddenly get upgraded
> so libc6 is 'used'.
I understand now. That makes sense. But tell me, if these other packages
were downgraded, would libc6 be uninstalled? Perhaps we should have a
mechanism for people to see why a package was installed, or upgraded? I
suspect that this won't be too difficult, as this info should already be
available for the auto-remove mechanism.
> Do you want deity to attempt -REALLY- hard to upgrade packages? Right now
> it is very wimpy and will not install, remove, etc anything to make an
> upgrade go through.
I have an image of this in my brain, that I try to get down onto paper (or
a web page as the case may be), but sometimes a few of the details slip
through. In implementing this, you are catching the many little things I
just glossed over in my head.
What I'm trying to say is that the way it is right now is pretty darned
good. I think anything more would be too much. We don't want to second
guess the user too much. I think we should wait for libreadusersmind.so
to become available before we go too much further in this direction. 8)
Thanks!
Behan
Behan Webster mailto:behanw@verisim.com
+1-613-224-7547 http://www.verisim.com/
Reply to: