From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22937 invoked by alias); 14 Sep 2017 20:46:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Sender: cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 22926 invoked by uid 89); 14 Sep 2017 20:46:32 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=offer, click, our X-HELO: limerock01.mail.cornell.edu Received: from limerock01.mail.cornell.edu (HELO limerock01.mail.cornell.edu) (128.84.13.241) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 20:46:31 +0000 X-CornellRouted: This message has been Routed already. Received: from authusersmtp.mail.cornell.edu (granite3.serverfarm.cornell.edu [10.16.197.8]) by limerock01.mail.cornell.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4_cu) with ESMTP id v8EKkTZq014307 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 16:46:29 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.4] (mta-68-175-129-7.twcny.rr.com [68.175.129.7] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by authusersmtp.mail.cornell.edu (8.14.4/8.12.10) with ESMTP id v8EKkSwO031130 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 16:46:28 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH setup 00/14] Use libsolv, solve all our problems... (WIP) To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com References: <20170531105015.162228-1-jon.turney@dronecode.org.uk> <488ba627-de58-ddc7-7f69-696adae76b8a@cornell.edu> <7a173f99-a2e1-a07c-a9df-5bebcf377957@cornell.edu> <87poau9znx.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <050204e5-0ed3-8e47-3825-58ec6a10f44f@cornell.edu> <87ingltcn0.fsf@Rainer.invalid> From: Ken Brown Message-ID: <4ed6c549-dddd-fc45-3ed8-f7339548d7cd@cornell.edu> Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2017 20:46:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87ingltcn0.fsf@Rainer.invalid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-PMX-Cornell-Gauge: Gauge=XXXXX X-PMX-CORNELL-AUTH-RESULTS: dkim-out=none; X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-09/txt/msg00020.txt.bz2 On 9/14/2017 1:26 PM, Achim Gratz wrote: > Ken Brown writes: >> What I've been struggling with, however, is the UI. But now that I >> think about it, maybe it isn't that hard. It's just a matter of doing >> something reasonable if the user unchecks "Accept default problem >> solutions". I'll see what I can come up with. > > Well, zypper pretty much just gives you a bunch of possible solutions > and asks you to select one if there is either more than one or the > otherwise preferred solution is blocked by a lock. There is always one > "break package by doing " down that list. You could > maybe offer something along those lines in the inevitable dialog box? In the long run I think that's the way to go. But implementing that is more work than I feel like doing at the moment. For now I've gone with an approach that was easier to program, more like the current setup.exe. If the solver finds problems (including missing dependencies), the user has four choices on the Prerequisite page: 1. Click Back to go back to the Chooser page, with the Pending view showing the solver's default solutions. 2. Click Next to accept the default solutions. 3. Uncheck the "Accept default solutions" box and click Next. If the user dismisses the resulting warning, setup will go ahead and do what the user requested. 4. Cancel. Once the inevitable remaining bugs are fixed, I think we'll have a setup.exe that's better than the current one, with possibilities for further UI improvements along the lines you suggested. Ken