Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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:

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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 >>>

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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.

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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. >

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hin...@fastmail.net> writes: > Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> 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. B

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> 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 f

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

“guix environment --ad-hoc” – and there are no collisions, because > upstream made the effort to ensure that these packages don’t provide > files of the same names. > > It is an unnecessary restriction to *prevent* users from installing > Python 2 and 3 interpreters into the same profile. Any

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

he same names. It is an unnecessary restriction to *prevent* users from installing Python 2 and 3 interpreters into the same profile. Any errors we see with mixing 2 and 3 is due to a bug in Guix which is due to our use of PYTHONPATH. In large environments Python 2 and 3 modules and interpreters can

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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.

Re: installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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

installing python 2 and python 3 in the same profile

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 same profile. It still works with ad-hoc environments, but manifests