Re: obscure <constraints> question

On 17/2/2002 17:55, Will Partain wrote:

> Proposal: in satisfying a constraint, we give preference to
> constraint-satisfiers *already encountered* for this field.
> In the example above, the second constraint would be
> *guaranteed* to be satisfied by package foo version 1.2.3,
> because we've already used that to satisfy a constraint.

I guess that makes sense in the terms of the normal order of constraints,
but wouldn't the more correct thing be to use the most specific constraint -
with 'foo 1.2.3' more specific than 'foo'.

Surely if we encounter 'foo 1.2.3' and 'foo 1.2.4' we want this to be an
error, rather than picking the first or second one depending on the order we
encountered them.

Of course I'm not looking at the necessary code here ;-)

Jonathan

-- 
jonathan hogg, one good idea ltd, 131 queen margaret dr., glasgow g20 8pd
http://www.onegoodidea.com/ tel:+44-(0)7976-614338 fax:+44-(0)7970-537451