[Aptitude-devel] Bug#878416: aptitude still doesn't do good conflict resolution

shirish शिरीष shirishag75 at gmail.com
Sun Nov 26 12:10:20 UTC 2017

at bottom :-

On 15/11/2017, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo at gmail.com> wrote:

> Essentially, aptitude tries hard to satisfy the users' requests, and the
> problems grow exponentially when adding different suites and
> architectures, because there are so many different possibilities to
> combine packages.
> If left to run long enough, probably it would end up spitting "no
> solution".  You can stop it if you don't want to wait that long.
> One way to guide its way to a quick solution would be to accept or
> reject actions in the first solution offered, e.g., reject the solution
> of keeping those not installed.
> At least in the occasions that I did it, guiding aptitude to your
> preferred outcomes leads to a very quick solution.  But there's never a
> guarantee that it's not going to explore the possible solutions, even if
> it takes ages.
> So I am not sure if it's possible to do something, but I don't see that
> changing this to not explore all solutions is a good option.
> BTW, that doesn't mean that aptitude doesn't do good conflict resolution
> -- maybe that's true, but I don't see this scenario as a good example of
> that, because probably what you requested has no solution at all.
> Cheers.
> --
> Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo at gmail.com>

Sorry for replying late, real life was happening and no web access for
last couple of weeks and more taking its toll.

I *think* the frustration was on two counts -

a. The amount of time it took to arrive at a solution

b. Then the amount of time it took to arrive at the next solution.

I do understand that at times it may be unable to provide any more
solutions, in those cases aptitude should say that . Also if there is
some kind of internal clock or percentage by which a user would know
when the solution or next solution would be coming, it would take out
the uncertainity to a large extent.

I have no idea if either of the above are workable although as a user
I would appreciate it as probably would people who value precision and

I hope you get what I'm trying to say.

          Shirish Agarwal  शिरीष अग्रवाल
  My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
EB80 462B 08E1 A0DE A73A  2C2F 9F3D C7A4 E1C4 D2D8

More information about the Aptitude-devel mailing list