Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Konrad Hinsen skribis:
>
>> On 14/03/2018 12:39, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
>>> Am 13.03.2018 um 22:52 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
2. Use different package names when we know things can be
parallel-installed: “python2” vs. “python” (I’m talking about the
>>>
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Yes. OTOH we use the “python2-” prefix for 2.x packages and “python-”
> for 3.x packages.
Indeed. What a mess!
>> This does of course raise the question of how this will evolve in the
>> long run, but since so many bad decisions were already taken, I am not
...
> Not
Hi,
Konrad Hinsen skribis:
> On 14/03/2018 12:39, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
>> Am 13.03.2018 um 22:52 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
>>>2. Use different package names when we know things can be
>>> parallel-installed: “python2” vs. “python” (I’m talking about the
>>> package name, not its
On 14/03/2018 12:39, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
Am 13.03.2018 um 22:52 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
2. Use different package names when we know things can be
parallel-installed: “python2” vs. “python” (I’m talking about the
package name, not its version string.) That’s what distros usuall
Am 13.03.2018 um 22:52 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
> 2. Use different package names when we know things can be
> parallel-installed: “python2” vs. “python” (I’m talking about the
> package name, not its version string.) That’s what distros usually
> do, and I think it’s good enough.
Ludovic Courtès writes:
>> How about a package property that defines a “conflicts?” predicate that
>> takes two packages of the same name and determines (e.g. by checking the
>> major version) if these two packages are conflicting? If no such
>> predicate is provided we assume that packages wit
Hello!
Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
> with the introduction of the collision avoidance feature that prevents
> you from installing different variants of the same package into a
> profile we made it impossible to install “python” and “python@2” into
> the same profile.
>
> It still works with ad-hoc e
Konrad Hinsen writes:
> Ricardo Wurmus writes:
>
>> It is an unnecessary restriction to *prevent* users from installing
>> Python 2 and 3 interpreters into the same profile. Any errors we see
>
> I agree. But the current question is not if we should allow people to
> shoot themselves into the
Ricardo Wurmus writes:
> It is an unnecessary restriction to *prevent* users from installing
> Python 2 and 3 interpreters into the same profile. Any errors we see
I agree. But the current question is not if we should allow people to
shoot themselves into the foot, but how much effort we should
On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 02:30:25PM +0100, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
> As I've been told, it's worse in Ruby, since rube is using the same
> gem-directories for all versions.
That is not accurate. Ruby uses even 'stable' numbers of minor
versions to split out. So 2.4.x and 2.6.x get installed in diff
On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 02:00:40PM +0100, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
> Am 10.03.2018 um 09:34 schrieb Pjotr Prins:
> > Generally, mixing Python2 and 3 in one profile makes no sense. During a
>
> I strongly disagree with the same arguments as Ricardo.
>
> The only reason we have problems installing bot
Am 11.03.2018 um 13:42 schrieb Pjotr Prins:
> But even in minor versions there are problems.
Yes, but it's not guix's job to solve the language programmer's problems.
Since quite some time, then python itnerpreters get installed as
"pythonX.Y", in addition to "pythonX" and "python". Thus it is pe
Am 10.03.2018 um 09:34 schrieb Pjotr Prins:
> Generally, mixing Python2 and 3 in one profile makes no sense. During a
I strongly disagree with the same arguments as Ricardo.
The only reason we have problems installing both python2 and python3 in
the same profile is: We are using PYTHONPATH in a w
On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 12:10:09PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> Obviously, I strongly disagree :)
You should ;)
> On my CentOS and Fedora machines at work both versions are installed
> (with the system package manager) and nobody complains. I can conjure
> up a Python 2 environment by calling
Pjotr Prins writes:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 08:50:48AM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>> Hi Guix,
>>
>> with the introduction of the collision avoidance feature that prevents
>> you from installing different variants of the same package into a
>> profile we made it impossible to install “python”
On 10/03/2018 09:34, Pjotr Prins wrote:
It still works with ad-hoc environments, but manifests containing both
Python versions cannot be instantiated any more. This is too strict,
because we know that these two variants don’t cause conflicts.
That is not my experience. Any mix is a problem.
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 08:50:48AM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> Hi Guix,
>
> with the introduction of the collision avoidance feature that prevents
> you from installing different variants of the same package into a
> profile we made it impossible to install “python” and “python@2” into
> the sa
17 matches
Mail list logo
