1 |
On Thursday 13 October 2011 14:15:54 Sebastian Luther wrote: |
2 |
> WARNING: One or more updates have been skipped due to a dependency |
3 |
> conflict: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> dev-python/numpy:0 |
6 |
> (dev-python/numpy-1.6.0::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) conflicts |
7 |
> with ~dev-python/numpy-1.5.1 required by |
8 |
> (sci-mathematics/sage-4.7.1-r2::sage-on-gentoo, installed) |
9 |
> |
10 |
> dev-python/pexpect:0 |
11 |
> (dev-python/pexpect-2.4-r1::sage-on-gentoo, ebuild scheduled for |
12 |
> merge) conflicts with ~dev-python/pexpect-2.0 required by |
13 |
> (sci-mathematics/sage-4.7.1-r2::sage-on-gentoo, installed) |
14 |
> |
15 |
> Fact is that sci-mathematics/sage can't be made work without those deps. |
16 |
> Fact is that I want this package and couldn't care less if I have the |
17 |
> latest version of these other two packages. |
18 |
> |
19 |
> If in turn I cared for the other two packages, then I would have to |
20 |
> remove sage. It's a choice but nothing else. |
21 |
|
22 |
it's a crap choice. users shouldn't have to select from diff sets of packages |
23 |
because some are too broken to work properly. it's a bug and needs to be |
24 |
fixed. and it shouldn't require twisting of arms to make people fix their |
25 |
broken packages. |
26 |
|
27 |
also, sci-mathematics/sage is a poor example here. it isn't in the main tree. |
28 |
if people want to add poor packages to their overlays, they're free to. |
29 |
-mike |