-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 341
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Solver Request #3141
Solver Request #3141
Conversation
925851a
to
a18cec0
Compare
@@ -94,8 +92,6 @@ namespace mamba | |||
|
|||
[[nodiscard]] const std::vector<specs::MatchSpec>& install_specs() const; | |||
[[nodiscard]] const std::vector<specs::MatchSpec>& remove_specs() const; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe a typedef would make it easier to read
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This was already here, planning to remove it in another PR.
PrefixData& prefix_data, | ||
std::vector<std::string> specs, | ||
bool no_pin, | ||
bool no_py_pin |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
- What does
no_py_pin
means (I guess it's for the python interpreter, but that could be for python packages), and why do we have a specific handling for it? - Can we imagine that in the future, more specific pinning handling would be required? In that case, maybe passing a "pin" structure instead of a bunch of boolean values coulb be safer.
- no_pin => no_gin =====>[] 😄
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's one of the CLI option --no-py-pin,--py-pin{false} Do not automatically pin Python
. Why? Conda.
Yes, we should definitly handle all that Python stuff in a more generic way, also true for pip_as_python_dependency
things which should really be a recommend
or something.
For now I'm just trying to change the solver.
{ | ||
if (first) | ||
{ | ||
out << "\nPinned packages:\n\n"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's fine to always print this at the beginning, even if the request contains no pinned packages. That would simplify a bit this function, and still give the explicit information that there is no pinned packages in the log (making easier to detect an accidental drop of the call to this funciton in a further refactoring).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Going for the status quo here since it was not the point of the PR.
A new libsolv independent interface for passing jobs to the Solver.