On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 19:03:35 +0530, Joachim Breitner wrote: > Hi, > > Am Montag, den 16.05.2011, 11:44 +0200 schrieb Raphael Hertzog: > > On Sun, 15 May 2011, Joachim Breitner wrote: > > > And in > > > the absence of conflicts, this means that A and B are co-installable. > > > > Yes, but what about this, T is the package we're considering to migrate. > > > > T depends on A, B > > A depends on D1 | D2 > > B depends on D2 | D3 > > D1 conflicts with D3 > > D2 is not satisfiable/installable in testing (but is in unstable) > > D1 is installable alone in testing > > D3 is installable alone in testing > > > > That said, I don't know if the current britney would detect anything wrong > > here either. > It does.
> There is a conflict, so I’m not claiming to handle this perfectly. I > hope such cases are rare. And note that my system allows for manual > addition of rules, so if we come across situations that are treated > insufficiently, and such situations are rare enough, additional > constraints can be added by the RM team. E.g. in this case, after some > thought, the additional constraint "T implies D2" should be sufficient. > Not sure I'd want to replace one manual task (adding hints for packages which need to migrate together) with another (handling conflicts). I have no precise idea how common that situation is; I fear it's more common than you seem to think. I like the part where we wouldn't have to keep maintaining much of this code though... Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
