On 2 February 2014 14:56, Chris Tillman <toff.till...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Tags: patch > > I think the root of the problem (removing being preferential to upgrading > in Aptitude's worldview) is that the safe-level and remove-level default > scores are the same. >
Hi Thanks for your interest and patch. Unfortunately, it is not an acceptable solution to apply to the _default_ settings. There is nothing fundamentally better or worse about either removals or installs, in some situations you might find this: solution 1: upgrade 20 packages solution 2: remove 1 Whichever is more preferable in these situations is up to the individual user to decide based on whatever particular packages are suggested for upgrade, install, or removal—aptitude can not know how the user values those individual actions. The point of the safety cost _levels_ is to broadly class categories of actions, and in that sense, installing or upgrading to a package in the target release is no better or worse than removing a non-essential package. Tweaking the default settings as per the patch here is not to be done lightly. Considering the architecture of the problem resolver as a whole, it is not an acceptable solution. I recommend any of Axels suggestions for individual users who are bothered by this, especially the comments about guiding the resolver by e.g. rejecting particular actions _before_ asking for the next solution. This is also covered in the users manual, _Resolving Dependencies Interactively_. That is the most effective way of informing the resolver about your desires. Regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
