<feed xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom'>
<title>apt/apt-pkg/depcache.cc, branch 2.1.1</title>
<subtitle>Debians commandline package manager</subtitle>
<id>https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/atom?h=2.1.1</id>
<link rel='self' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/atom?h=2.1.1'/>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/'/>
<updated>2020-05-08T13:52:14Z</updated>
<entry>
<title>Allow aptitude to MarkInstall broken packages via FromUser</title>
<updated>2020-05-08T13:52:14Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2020-05-08T10:38:02Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=30fa50e8d593556553147478a2d5ea7a550f9e16'/>
<id>urn:sha1:30fa50e8d593556553147478a2d5ea7a550f9e16</id>
<content type='text'>
apt marks packages coming from the commandline among others
as protected to ensure the various resolver parts do not fiddle
with the state of these packages. aptitude (and potentially others)
do not so the state is modified (to a Keep which for uninstalled means
it is not going to be installed) due to being uninstallable before
the call fails – basically reverting at least some state changes the
call made before it realized it has to fail, which is usually a good
idea, except if users expect you to not do it.

They do set the FromUser option though which has beside controlling
autobit also gained the notion of "the user is always right" over time
and can be used for this one here as well preventing the state revert.

References: 0de399391372450d0162b5a09bfca554b2d27c3d
Reported-By: Jessica Clarke &lt;jrtc27@debian.org&gt; on IRC
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Protect a package while resolving in MarkInstall</title>
<updated>2020-04-27T11:51:46Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2020-04-27T11:51:46Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=ae23e53f99ea0b7920744a7303fdee64796b7cce'/>
<id>urn:sha1:ae23e53f99ea0b7920744a7303fdee64796b7cce</id>
<content type='text'>
Strange things happen if while resolving the dependencies of a package
said dependencies want to remove the package. The allow-scores test e.g.
removed the preferred alternative in favor of the last one now that they
were exclusive. In our or-group for Recommends we would "just" not
statisfy the Recommends and for Depends we engage the ProblemResolver…
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Prefer upgrading installed orgroup members</title>
<updated>2020-04-27T11:49:43Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2020-04-26T19:09:14Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=ca14e1e2c3f3c9782f374757ca4605ce7e5670ad'/>
<id>urn:sha1:ca14e1e2c3f3c9782f374757ca4605ce7e5670ad</id>
<content type='text'>
In normal upgrade scenarios this is no problem as the orgroup member
will be marked for upgrade already, but on a not fully upgraded system
(or while you operate on a different target release) we would go with our
usual "first come first serve" approach which might lead us to install
another provider who comes earlier – bad if the providers conflict.
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Propagate Protected flag to single-option dependencies</title>
<updated>2020-04-27T11:49:19Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2020-04-27T11:49:19Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=f76a8d331a81bc7b102bdd4e0f8363e8a59f64f6'/>
<id>urn:sha1:f76a8d331a81bc7b102bdd4e0f8363e8a59f64f6</id>
<content type='text'>
If a package is protected and has a dependency satisfied only by a single
package (or conflicts with a package) this package must be part of the
solution and so we can help later actions not exploring dead ends by
propagating the protected flag to these "pseudo-protected" packages.

An (obscure) bug this can help prevent (to some extend) is shown in
test-apt-never-markauto-sections by not causing irreversible autobit
transfers.

As a sideeffect it seems also to help our crude ShowBroken to display
slightly more helpful messages involving the packages which are actually
in conflict.
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Fail earlier on impossible Conflicts in MarkInstall</title>
<updated>2020-04-27T11:48:33Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2020-04-27T11:48:33Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=347ea3f76ab263c729468e07b910ae027b66c9d8'/>
<id>urn:sha1:347ea3f76ab263c729468e07b910ae027b66c9d8</id>
<content type='text'>
MarkDelete is not recursive as MarkInstall is and we can not conflict
with ourselves anyhow, so we can move the unavoidable deletes before
changing the state of the package in question avoiding the need for the
state update in case of conflicts we can not deal with (e.g. the package
conflicts with an explicit user request).
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Split up MarkInstall into private helper methods</title>
<updated>2020-04-27T11:47:08Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2020-04-26T11:14:43Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=76498d46855c88b90316e4369ac32050db9a9d23'/>
<id>urn:sha1:76498d46855c88b90316e4369ac32050db9a9d23</id>
<content type='text'>
Should be easier to move the code bits around then and it helps in
documenting a bit what the blocks do and how they interact (or not).
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Discard candidate if its dependencies can't be satisfied</title>
<updated>2020-04-27T11:45:59Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2020-04-26T11:11:31Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=0de399391372450d0162b5a09bfca554b2d27c3d'/>
<id>urn:sha1:0de399391372450d0162b5a09bfca554b2d27c3d</id>
<content type='text'>
We do pretty much the same in IsInstallOk, but here we have already set
the state, so we have to unroll the state as well to sort-of replicate
the state we were in before this MarkInstall failed.
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Refactor and reorder MarkInstall code</title>
<updated>2020-04-27T11:45:41Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2020-04-27T11:45:41Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=924704ba1dc13f73edb0db6c3c8c07ccf0ec26b6'/>
<id>urn:sha1:924704ba1dc13f73edb0db6c3c8c07ccf0ec26b6</id>
<content type='text'>
This fixes no bugs per se, but the idea is to delay more costly changes
and check easier things first. It e.g. inhibits the moving of the
autobit until we are sure that this MarkInstall call isn't going to
fail (e.g. because a dependency isn't satisfiable).
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Explore or-groups for Recommends further than first</title>
<updated>2020-04-27T11:44:24Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2020-04-25T09:28:47Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=ff4555c72df967e40590d9e8c6ce83e9df4c46ea'/>
<id>urn:sha1:ff4555c72df967e40590d9e8c6ce83e9df4c46ea</id>
<content type='text'>
MarkInstall only looks at the first alternative in an or-group which has
a fighting chance of being satisfiable (= the package itself satisfies
the dependency, if it is installable itself is not considered).

This is "hidden" for Depends by the problem resolver who will try
another member of the or-group later, but Recommends are not a problem
for it, so for them the alternatives are never further explored.

Exploring the or-group in MarkInstall seems like the better choice for
both types as that frees the problem resolver to deal with the hard
things like package conflicts.
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Discard impossible candidate versions also for non-installed</title>
<updated>2020-04-26T16:35:34Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2020-04-25T08:00:34Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=aa7d2f55a0b0d683fbcd46d2a80c99957b788c3a'/>
<id>urn:sha1:aa7d2f55a0b0d683fbcd46d2a80c99957b788c3a</id>
<content type='text'>
We reseted the candidate for installed packages back to the version
which is installed if one of the (critical) dependencies of it is not
statisfiable, but we can do the same for non-installed packages by
discarding the candidate which beside slightly helping the resolver also
improves error messages generated by apt as a sideeffect.
</content>
</entry>
</feed>
