[wpkg-users] [Bug 117] Dependencies ignore priority

[bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.wpkg.org]

http://bugzilla.wpkg.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117





--- Comment #14 from Frank Lee <rl201 at cam.ac.uk>  2008-05-10 20:35:33 ---
(In reply to comment #13)

> I am using only one single Debian system and up to now I never looked at such
> details. But for Debian package management it might be slightly different. As
> Debian delivers _binary_ packages it does not matter that much if a package is
> installed before or after the one it depends on is added. Why? Simply because
> after a software updated all binaries are available. So even if package A
> depends on package B then package A can be installed before package B (it might
> not run until package B is installed too but this might be accepted).
> 
> For Gentoo for example it is a different story. If package B is not installed,
> then the compilation of package A might not be possible at all.

Okay - it seems we're approaching Windows package management from viewpoints
coloured by our respective Linux experience! (And why not? Linux in general
does this all so much better! I might argue that Wpkg is geared to binary
packages too, of course - but perhaps we need little further discussion about
the issue!)

> The same applies for WPKG. If you use "includes" then it might happen that
> OfficeSP3 is installed before OfficeXP - which will clearly fail. As you said
> you can influence the order of installation by assigning priorities - but
> "leveling" priorities of a lot of package with various "cross-includes" might
> become quite hard to maintain.
> 
> But I am fine with that - introducing the <include .../> syntax will allow you
> to do so if you wish.

Okay - that sounds good. I think "include" is a more sensible name for this
sort of thing, even if it does put the onus on the WPKG admin to get the
priorities right. Having more than one way of achieving the same objective is
good, I think.

> Thanks, I was not sure if it could be acceptable for you. A simple 'sed' script
> might help then to turn your dependencies into includes within all packages.

Well, some sort of sed script which works on SQL would be useful! (-: But it's
only one change for me and it makes life simpler for everyone else...

[Re: Chained packages]
> Yes. Package specified like this will be installed directly after installing
> the package which chained it (even before advancing to the next package within
> the profile definition).

Okay, that's a useful definition, thanks. We need to make sure that things are
clear - I think that was where I was at fault in the original "depends"
definition!

To implement this, I'll code up some intermediate step which treats "depends"
and "includes" in the same way. I'll upload the patch to this bug report in
case it's useful for anyone else but I *don't* intend it to be included in the
main wpkg.js: I'm happy to code up a patch for includes, of course, based on
the original patch posted, which should be more useful. No comments on
timescale, so if Rainer gets there first that's fine by me!

Yours,

Frank


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.wpkg.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.