[PATCH setup 00/14] Use libsolv, solve all our problems... (WIP)

[Ken Brown]

On 1/13/2018 5:55 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 1/13/2018 4:29 PM, Brian Inglis wrote:
>> On 2018-01-13 12:56, Ken Brown wrote:
>>> 2. We should probably remove, or at least reword, the dire warning about
>>> accepting the default solutions.  I'm not sure we want to "strongly 
>>> recommend"
>>> the default solution over the other solution(s).  I guess what we 
>>> really want to
>>> say is that we strongly recommend resolving the problems before 
>>> continuing.
>>
>> For users who only run setup and use programs, a dire warning and strong
>> recommendations are appropriate.
>>
>> Alternatives are to also remove all packages dependent on the package 
>> to be
>> removed, or lastly, to remove only the requested package, leaving the
>> installation inconsistent. Those alternatives would have to be 
>> presented to the
>> user for selection, then executed.
>>
>> Anything else requiring the user to resolve would require a FAQ entry 
>> explaining
>> what that meant, what diagnosis and actions would be required, and 
>> that would
>> probably generate emails from users asking what they should do.
>>
>> Better to allow the solver to resolve issues and just let users choose
>> straightforward alternatives, with the view of trying to keep the 
>> installation
>> consistent, unless explicitly overridden, such as to test an alternative
>> implementation of a dependency installed outside of setup.
> 
> The current situation on the topic/libsolv branch is the following. 
> Suppose A requires B and the user asks to uninstall B.  They will get a 
> problem report showing two possible solutions:
> 
> 1. Uninstall A.
> 2. (default) Don't uninstall B.
> 
> If they uncheck 'Accept default solutions' and select 'Next', they'll 
> get a warning that says "We strongly recommend that you accept the 
> default solutions.  Some packages may not work properly if you don't. 
> Are you sure you want to proceed?"
> 
> This is misleading insofar as it implies that something bad will happen 
> if the user prefers to solve the problem by uninstalling A.  What is 
> true is that some packages may not work properly if the user answers 'Yes'.
> 
> I think we should be able to find wording that is accurate while still 
> making it clear that we recommend going back and fixing the problem.  I 
> don't yet have a good candidate for that wording.

Something like the attached might do the job.

Ken

-------------- next part --------------
>From d15d18dfa4db91416155385034bccf31be88ece3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ken Brown <kbrown@cornell.edu>
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 18:50:14 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] Clarify the unsolved-problems warning

If the user unchecks the 'Accept default solutions' box and selects
'Next', don't imply that choosing a non-default solution would break
their system.
---
 prereq.cc | 7 +++----
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/prereq.cc b/prereq.cc
index a03e79b..4926c65 100644
--- a/prereq.cc
+++ b/prereq.cc
@@ -96,10 +96,9 @@ PrereqPage::OnNext ()
     {
       // breakage imminent!  danger, danger
       int res = MessageBox (h,
-          "We strongly recommend that you accept the default solutions. "
-          "Some packages may not work properly if you don't."
+          "Some packages may not work properly if you continue."
           "\r\n\r\n"
-          "Are you sure you want to proceed?",
+          "Are you sure you want to proceed (NOT RECOMMENDED)?",
           "WARNING - Unsolved Problems",
           MB_YESNO | MB_ICONEXCLAMATION | MB_DEFBUTTON2);
       if (res == IDNO)
@@ -107,7 +106,7 @@ PrereqPage::OnNext ()
       else
         {
           Log (LOG_PLAIN) <<
-            "NOTE!  User refused the default solutions!  "
+            "NOTE!  User continued with unsolved problems!  "
             "Expect some packages to give errors or not function at all." << endLog;
           // Change the solver's transaction list to reflect the user's choices.
           db.solution.db2trans();
-- 
2.15.1