Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 09:45:16AM +0200, Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
>> Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > That's one interesting question. We can get some more of the answer
>> > by passing "-o aptitude::cmdline::resolver-debug=true" and capturing the
>> > output (warning, this generates a LOT of text).
>>
>> Here's the output. I answered "n" to aptitude's suggestions until it
>> agreed to upgrade teTeX.
>>
>> Regards, Frank
>
> At a quick glance, I think that this is where it runs into trouble:
>
>> Trying to resolve tetex-extra 3.0.dfsg.2-2 -> {latex-beamer 3.06.dfsg.1-0.1}
>> by installing tetex-extra 2.0.2c-8 from the dependency source
>> Trying to resolve tetex-extra 3.0.dfsg.2-2 -> {latex-beamer 3.06.dfsg.1-0.1}
>> by installing tetex-extra [UNINST] from the dependency source
>> Trying to resolve tetex-extra 3.0.dfsg.2-2 -> {latex-beamer 3.06.dfsg.1-0.1}
>> by installing latex-beamer 3.06.dfsg.1-0.1
[...]
> It thinks that it's better to remove tetex-extra (score -509) than
> to try to install latex-beamer (score -1028) or to drop the
> recommendation (score -959). My guess is that this is due to the
> penalty for unresolved dependencies in a partial solution: it looks like
> things are getting better when tetex-extra is dropped (thus fixing all
> its dependencies) relative to the other solutions. It looks like a lot
> of the dependencies are "forced", meaning that they have only one
> solution, so I wonder if I could improve results in this case by firing
> all those constraints immediately. (this would just be a hack/heuristic,
> though)
I don't understand this - what's so special about tetex-extra? And how
does tetex-extra_2.0.2c-8 come in to play?
Anyway, if you think you have a fix, I'm happy to test it.
Regards, Frank
--
Dr. Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
