| 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 |
Archives