Wouldn't you want exactly that - mark packages for which a newer version appeared on configured repositories in the meantime, as the candidates for update?
Actually, no.
The distinction is between available and installable updates.
I might be interested in (all) available updates but those actually installable are of much greater value.
I see your point. Anyway, I don't think it is possible (taking only 'static' data, not running the solver) to tell in advance whether the package that has newer version available, is also 'updatable' i.e. if this newer version is installable at the end. But users just want to see which package has newer version available (and which is, at least theoretically, 'updatable'). And they even want to be able to distinguish between them visually, using e.g. different color or a visual mark. I recall seeing several (usability related) bugs on this.
I don't think she's able to decide between updating foo or bar. The solver, together with the policies defined by the admin, is the right place for such decisions.
Please note that in UI, marking package for update does not necessarily mean that this package will be unconditionally updated at the end and the dependencies get all *cobe*d up because of it. It is only the means how the user tells the solver 'Hey there, I want you to update this package for me'. But at the end, it is the solver and its policies, who is the highest authority there. The one, who performs dependency check and who might refuse to respect user's decision and not to update particular pack, even if user wanted it to. frozenB. -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: yast-devel+help@opensuse.org