Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.

Bug 352530

Summary:	[planner] Incomplete detailed explanation
Product:	[Eclipse Project] Equinox	Reporter:	Thomas Hallgren <thomas>
Component:	p2	Assignee:	P2 Inbox <equinox.p2-inbox>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:
Severity:	normal
Priority:	P3	CC:	leberre, miles.daffin, pascal, wayne.beaton
Version:	3.7
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	All
Whiteboard:	stalebug
Bug Depends on:
Bug Blocks:	352233

Description Thomas Hallgren

2011-07-20 02:03:45 EDT

I have a case where the planner discovers 4 conflicting dependencies (sample report below). When examining the individual explanations that are provided by the PlannerStatus.getExplanations() method, I can only find explanations for the branches leading up to the first two conflicts. There's no mention of the latter two. This is problematic in the b3 aggregator since we aim to provide information about exactly which contributions it is that are problematic.

Is this per design? Does p2 stop generating details once it has found two conflicting entries?

Cannot complete the install because of a conflicting dependency.
Only one of the following can be installed at once: 
  Scala Plugin 2.0.0.beta08-28-201107121559-7d78460 (org.scala-ide.sdt.core 2.0.0.beta08-28-201107121559-7d78460)
  Scala Plugin 2.0.0.beta08-29-201107121555-7d78460 (org.scala-ide.sdt.core 2.0.0.beta08-29-201107121555-7d78460)
  Scala Plugin 2.0.0.nightly-29-201107190021-ad5bb29 (org.scala-ide.sdt.core 2.0.0.nightly-29-201107190021-ad5bb29)
  Scala Plugin 1.1.0.201105291637-milestones-M01 (org.scala-ide.sdt.core 1.1.0.201105291637-milestones-M01)

Comment 1 Pascal Rapicault

2011-07-20 05:33:25 EDT

In this case I think the message is misleading because the explanation message is created from all the elements that are singletons in the slice, however not all of them may be in conflict.

Comment 2 Thomas Hallgren

2011-07-20 05:56:05 EDT

So what you're saying is that we should have more trust in the explanations than in the original message?

Comment 3 Daniel Le Berre

2011-07-20 09:47:58 EDT

Thomas,

p2 provides only one explanation at the time, because this is the simplest way to proceed.

If you need multiple explanations (e.g. all possible ones), that is possible but not trivial, but will need to be implemented in Sat4j first :)

http://jira.ow2.org/browse/SAT-2

Comment 4 Wayne Beaton

2012-01-13 12:11:35 EST

Does this bug need to be restricted to committers only?

Comment 5 Eclipse Genie

2019-05-10 17:16:50 EDT

This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet.

If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.

--
The automated Eclipse Genie.