1 |
2010-03-19 11:13:48 Dale napisał(a): |
2 |
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
3 |
> > On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 04:23:31 -0500 |
4 |
> > Dale<rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> >>> It's being installed because it's a dependency of something you use. |
7 |
> >>> |
8 |
> >>> Replace Python with any other library and we wouldn't be having this |
9 |
> >>> discussion. |
10 |
> >>> |
11 |
> >> OK. Right now, as you type this, what package depends on python-3 |
12 |
> >> and won't work with python-2? Anything at all? If it is nothing, |
13 |
> >> then why install it? |
14 |
> >> |
15 |
> > And that's where you're making the mistake: you're treating Python as |
16 |
> > being different from every other package. |
17 |
> > |
18 |
> > In every other case, you want things to be using the newest version of a |
19 |
> > slotted package where possible. Why aren't you complaining that you were |
20 |
> > forced to install gcc 4.3 and 4.1 when 3.4 worked just fine? |
21 |
> > |
22 |
> > |
23 |
> Because, when I installed gcc 4.3, I could then unmerge the old gcc. |
24 |
> That's why I didn't complain about that. With python, we still have to |
25 |
> have the current version plus the new version which is not being used at |
26 |
> all. |
27 |
> |
28 |
> Am I not correct in that? If the new python is installed, what exactly |
29 |
> is going to use it? I used the new gcc. It worked fine. I unmerged |
30 |
> the old one with no wasted space and one less package installed. This |
31 |
> doesn't appear to be the case with python-3 tho. It's going to be |
32 |
> installed and just sit there like a rock. |
33 |
|
34 |
Python 3 is used during installation of packages, which support Python 2 and |
35 |
Python 3 and support installation for multiple Python ABIs. You can directly |
36 |
execute scripts with "-3.1" suffix (e.g. "bpython-3.1" or "coverage-3.1") |
37 |
to use Python 3.1 even when Python 2.* is set as main active version of Python. |
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis |