<p dir="ltr">Agrees.</p>
<br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, 29 Mar, 2023, 2:51 am Piotr H. Dabrowski, <<a href="mailto:phd@phd.re">phd@phd.re</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Package: aptitude<br>Version: 0.8.13<br><br>"aptitude full-upgrade" failed to resolve conflicts properly, proposing many removals of vital packages.<br>Meanwhile "aptitude safe-upgrade" proposed an ideal solution immediately.<br><br>This happened while using aptitude in Kubuntu, but I think Debian may have similar issues when upgrading related KDE packages.<br>I upgraded Kubuntu 22.04 to 22.10 (which went smoothly), cleaned up any leftover obsolete packages afterwards (nothing important and related to this problem).<br>Then I added (back) kubuntu-backports repository to get the latest version of KDE for Kubuntu 22.10 (upgrade from KDE 5.25.5 to 5.27.3) and tried to apply the updates with "aptitude full-upgrade".<br><br>I attach solutions proposed by both "full-upgrade" and "safe-upgrade", and also aptitude's log on what "safe-upgrade" eventually did.<br><br>It seems that the right solution (immediately proposed by "safe-upgrade") was to remove obsolete packages, mainly:<br>- libkf5screen7<br>- libkwineffects13<br>- libkwinglutils13<br>and replace them with their newer releases (as required by other vital KDE packages):<br>- libkf5screen8<br>- libkwineffects14<br>- libkwinglutils14<br><br>Instead "full-upgrade" tried to keep old versions of the above libraries while removing vital KDE packages that depended on them (kscreen, kwin-common, kwin-wayland, kwin-x11, libkscreenlocker5, libnotificationmanager1, powerdevil, ...).<br><br>To my understanding, "full-upgrade" ought to be a stronger version of upgrade, that resolves conflicts at least as good as "safe-upgrade" while allowing to also remove packages in the process.<br>But it should not *needlessly* propose removal of important packages, when there is a better solution (not requiring removal of vital packages), which "safe-upgrade" finds in no time.<br><br>Is there a bug in "full-upgrade" conflict resolution in that case?<br>Or is such thing supposed to occur for "full-upgrade" ?<br><br>Maybe "full-upgrade" should simply begin with suggesting a solution that "safe-upgrade" would propose, if it is a sane one?<br><div><br></div><div><br></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Aptitude-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Aptitude-devel@alioth-lists.debian.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Aptitude-devel@alioth-lists.debian.net</a><br>
<a href="https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel</a><br>
</blockquote></div>