[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFC: The Future of Solving Dependency Problems in APT (SAT, CUDF)



On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 12:17:07PM +0100, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> The script I wrote drops duplicates currently. The right solution is
> to add the version ID to the package: field and to add a provides
> package:
> 
> 	package: apt%1
> 	provides: apt
> 
> I'm also using this trick for splitting virtual packages from real ones
> like this:
> 	package: apt
> 	provides: virtual%packagename, virtual%apt

I see, this does indeed address the corresponding glitch I've mentioned
in my follow-up to David.

> In this case, I used the '%' character as that's not allowed in
> package names and does not seem to be reserved in CUDF either.

It is only suggested to use that for escaping (a la URL encoding), but
it doesn't indeed have any special meaning.

> It's just a simple prototype to test how I can create CUDF. I attached
> the script. It defines some extra unused properties for now, but
> converts predepends to depends and breaks to conflicts; so the solver
> can handle them. The output is valid according to cudf-check -univ.

Nice, thanks, I'll have a look at it.

Cheers.

-- 
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, |  .  |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Capossela .......| ..: |.......... -- C. Adams

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: