[Mageia-dev] Orphans - those poor orphans . . .

Sat Jan 7 11:39:29 CET 2012

2012/1/7 andre999 <andre999mga at laposte.net>:
+> Sander Lepik a écrit :
+>>
+>> 07.01.2012 01:09, Johnny A. Solbu kirjutas:
+>>>
+>>> On Friday 06 January 2012 18:54, Balcaen John wrote:
+>>>>
+>>>> I guess when you did encounter that you just remove task-kde from your
+>>>> system
+>>>
+>>> I did not. I should have been more clearly with my example. :-)=
+>>> The packages in my example where all console program, that I installed
+>>> and removed using urpm[ie]. So I explicitly removed only the one program I
+>>> just installed. And it did not install any other packages, as a result of
+>>> dependencies.
+>>>
+>>> And this is my point. We uninstall a specific program, not a meta/task
+>>> package, which result in some packages beeing marked as orphaned, when they
+>>> are infact Not orphaned.
+>>
+>> Give us command line example. Install something and remove it and then
+>> show me what got orphaned if it wasn't orphan before. What you claim here
+>> doesn't sound right as i haven't seen it myself.
+>>
+>> --
+>> Sander
+>
+>
+> It is not exactly the same thing, but in more than one occasion when I
+> installed packages with similar functions at the same time, to compare them,
+> say A, B, and C, and later uninstalled B and C, I have found A to be
+> declared an orphan.  Only to find that it had been required by one of the
+> others.
+> (I often prefer command-line packages.  It is simple to add them to the menu
+> if I want.  And I have often enough made such comparisons.  To be fair, I
+> haven't done much of that since installing Mageia, when it first became
+> available.)
+>
+> Really though, we should consider how people work with installing software.
+>
+> The auto-orphans option and how it currently works is based on the
+> assumption that if package A is installed as a requirement of package B,
+> that on uninstalling B, one will want to uninstall A.  That to me is a false
+> premise.
+> It is likely to be the case, but not necessarily.
+> Generally users will use the graphic installer (rpmdrake), as it is more
+> convenient.  When the question of orphans is presented, if it is presented,
+> one should be presented with the same options that are presented on
+> installation with required packages.  That is, to be able to query the
+> description ("more info") of the associated packages, and thus readily make
+> an informed decision of what to remove.
+
+This is ok if you have 2 or 3 orphans. But it is unpractical if more
+packages are declared as orphans. As I wrote earlier, when he is
+presented with a list of 20 or even 100 "orphans" the user will
+definitely not sit down and check each package for "more info".
+
+-- 
+wobo
+