----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Keener" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > he solution is wrong, but I can't articulate (yet) how the model is > > wrong, and so I've followed the (apparent) consensus. > > I don't know why that doesn't seem right to you. It appears to me that I will > never have an installation that is comprised solely of all Test packages. [Devil's advocate mode on] Why not? Debian has one, and it works great. > I > will always be testing a few packages but the bulk of the system will be the > current Stable versions. That would naturally be the nature of the beast as > working with all test versions would be to cumbersome to find where something > was failing. That said if I have to work with Current Stable versions while I > am testing experimental packages why would I want the default on the installed > packages to be Uninstall - I would want to keep those packages so I would still > have a working system. I also do not particularly want to click on 20 packages > to say keep these instead of uninstalling. Makes perfect sense to me. I have never said that I want every package to uninstall. I have explained that that behaviour is a SIDE EFFECT of the behaviour I want, which is for system smarts about the intention of maintainers to be removed from setup, and made explicit. This gives greater flexability, and the potential for quicker changes - because setup.exe won't be part of the change process. However, that was not what I was referring to in saying that the solution is wrong. I mean that the whole x= prev/curr/test y=version model is wrong, and because THAT is wrong, the GUI and engine behaviour is confusing (because it has multiple, reasonable interpretations). > As to the NULL file when reinstalling - that patch was applied to HEAD and not ... > tried to just install zlib it still failed and would not install zlib. It just > doesn't seem to like the last file. I'll have a look-see. Rob
