From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Different versions of a package in the same profile? Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 00:07:14 +0100 Message-ID: <87lhnxgnrx.fsf_-_@gnu.org> References: <87ioj566pv.fsf@gnu.org> <8761f5zlph.fsf@gmail.com> <87fve9po7v.fsf@yeeloong.lan> <87y4s1zdjl.fsf@gnu.org> <871tptzclb.fsf@gmail.com> <87mw8glixr.fsf@gnu.org> <20141029222212.GD29707@debian> <87bnouf24g.fsf@gmail.com> <20141030074926.GA27584@debian> <877fzhg2ng.fsf@gmail.com> <20141030123832.GA6721@debian.eduroam.u-bordeaux.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50552) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XkE3z-0005TQ-P5 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 11:25:25 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xjynv-0001FX-IP for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Oct 2014 19:07:01 -0400 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([2a01:474::1]:41354) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xjynv-0001El-Aj for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Oct 2014 19:06:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20141030123832.GA6721@debian.eduroam.u-bordeaux.fr> (Andreas Enge's message of "Thu, 30 Oct 2014 13:38:32 +0100") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Andreas Enge Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Alex Kost Andreas Enge skribis: > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 03:31:15PM +0300, Alex Kost wrote: >> I think the latter is a bug. IMHO it shouldn't be possible to install >> several packages with the same name in one profile. > > Well, having python 2 and 3 is reasonable, and from what I saw in their > naming scheme, it is entirely possible (the python binary being renamed > to python 3). Qt 4 and 5 are, I think, another case. How about GTK+ 2 and= 3? Actually, Qt 4 and 5 use non-versioned file names under bin/. Technically it would be easy to allow the installation of different versions of a package in the same profile, but I wonder about the implications. For instance, =E2=80=98-u foo=E2=80=99 would upgrade all the installed vers= ions of =E2=80=98foo=E2=80=99, so you would end up with exactly the same version tw= ice. Ludo=E2=80=99.