> Please note that the example I commented on was an explicit > request to install a specific package, not a general update. > > smart just told the user that it needed to downgrade to > fulfil the request, which is true. What the other tools do in > the same situation is listed on the same page. That's exactly the idea. We're all in the same boat, looking at the same issues from different angles. Smart has algorithms to choose a better possibility given the available options. Jeff seems to be looking for a debug tool to detect broken distributions. > > So as an advanced user you might find the automated decision making > > as to what to remove or to downgrade useful a novice user will be > > confused because they might assume the downgrading is a perfectly > > natural thing. Why was the dependency broken? Why was the downgrade needed? Why the old package was still available if downgrading to it was a bad option? Smart currently is not a debugging tool (it might easily become one though, and I've used portions of it to do so). It's a tool to help users achieve a given goal they're looking for. Any distribution wanting to prevent Smart from doing downgrades may very easily do so, but IMO, the correct way to handle it is not to prevent Smart from doing downgrades, but preventing downgrades to be actually needed as a distribution supporter. If things are broken, then let Smart do its job trying to find a feasible solution. [...] > I am running rawhide with smart. Enabled repos are fc-devel@0, freshrpms@0, > dag@-5 newrpms@-5, atrpms-stable@-10, atrpms-good@-10, atrpms-bleeding@-20. > > It's heaven. I'm glad to hear that. Let me know if you find problems. -- Gustavo Niemeyer http://niemeyer.net
