[pacman-dev] [patch] alpm_removedeps bug+fix && alpm_depcmp-discussion

[ngaba at petra.hos.u-szeged.hu]

> IMO, doing things right is what we want to do in 99% of the cases this
> speed vs. perfection issue comes up, so I'm going to disagree with you
> here.
I have the same opinion usually (see my earlier sortbydeps complaints 
.-). But now we just search for removable dependencies, if we miss some 
pathological cases this is not a big problem, the database won't be 
corrupted, just we don't remove a dependency which we could etc.
Let me explain: I meant in my previous mail that we say that we cannot 
remove a package bacause it is needed by an other one without checking 
that it cannot be "replaced" by an other installed one (see 
alpm_checkdeps && multiple provision). But this "fault" is _very_ rare 
and this extra check would cause _notable_ slowdown, because 
can_remove_package is (/was?) called "often".
Bye, ngaba


----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.