Control: tags -1 - confirmed + wontfix
2012-09-14 12:15 Daniel Hartwig:
Control: retitle -1 aptitude: [curses] actions on package sets should respect holds Control: tags -1 confirmed The reasoning here is that holds, etc. should be respected unless a user performs an action specifically on a given package. That is, given this situation: --\ Upgradable Packages (553) A --\ admin (40) --\ main (40) i adduser 3.113+nmu1 3.113+nmu3 i at 3.1.13-1 3.1.13-2 B ih base-files 6.7 6.11 performing an install on line A should not cause the package base-files to be upgraded since it is marked as held. Performing an install on line B *should* cause that package to be upgraded. It makes sense to have this behaviour configurable. In any given circumstance it may or may not be the users intention to respect holds. For actions on package sets, setting FromUser=false when calling MarkInstall would achieve this. When installing packages that will have the side effect of also marking them auto-installed. This will need to be managed to prevent that happening.
I do not think that the current behaviour existing for years should be changed lightly. If this is changed for Holds, probably should be changed at least for Forbid-version as well, and a whole bunch of documentation changed everywhere. In general, this would add an inconsistency in the handling of applying actions for whole groups, and maybe this should be revisited for others as well. For example, should "keep" (":") reset Holds in that case? It resets Holds in the individual case, so if there is a whole group with only (or many/mostly) Hold packages, perhaps the user expects to do this as the only way to unhold a package in curses (without going one by one). Should Hold itself be allowed to be applied to groups, if Unhold is not allowed? And so on. Configuration, as the last e-mails says, would solve some of these concerns. But adding configuration options is also to not to be done lightly, once added it never goes away -- and we already have a huge amount of those, and a very complex configuration at that (complexity of the fields, mix/interferences with apt options, etc). As an alternative solution, one can temporarily limit the screen with "!~ahold", so the package view ignores packages on hold while the actions are performed on the groups. I think that this is a simple, quick and elegant solution to this problem. In any case, after 8 years since the original request and 3 since the last message, I think that it's fairly clear to conclude that this is not going to be addressed in the near future, so leaving open but marking as +wontfix for the time being. Cheers. -- Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montez...@gmail.com>