On 2016-04-01 19:58:20 +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote: > 2016-03-22 13:27 Vincent Lefevre: > > A single removal is bad if it is an application. > > That's strange coming from you, who use the resolver costs of minimizing > removals ;-)
Not really. What I want is: * no removals = good * any number of removals = bad Minimizing removals seems to be the best choice to do that. I would prefer something like "removals ? 10000 : 0", but that's not possible. Now, the "removals" solution cost guarantees that the first solution doesn't contain any removal. So, that's OK. I can do a clean upgrade first (without removals at all), then inspect what to do about the removals. Without the "removals" solution cost, this is not possible. -- Vincent Lefèvre <[email protected]> - 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) _______________________________________________ Aptitude-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel
