New Pip resolver takes a long time to complete

Re:New Pip resolver takes a long time to complete by jrochkind1 on Friday December 04, 2020 @12:43PM (#25305359)

Huh, in that case I have the converse question -- when specifying dependencies for X, can you not say A 1.x but not 2.x, because 2.x has or is expected to have backwards breaking changes? Otherwise, when A releases 2.0 with some backwards incompatibilities, and all packages that use A as a dependency are rebuilt, don't they break?

These issues (allow updates within limits) are what I understand as the point of dependency resolution, I'm trying to understand how you do without it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:New Pip resolver takes a long time to complete by danieldk on Saturday December 05, 2020 @02:31AM (#25312620)

These issues (allow updates within limits) are what I understand as the point of dependency resolution, I'm trying to understand how you do without it.

In such a case e.g. nixpkgs makes two attributes: a_1 and a_2 (and alias a to a_2). Packages that still require A 1.x will have a_1 as one of their dependencies, the rest a.

This is avoided as much as possible, but is sometimes necessary. Common examples are Gtk 2 applications or C/C++ applications that can only be built against a Python 2 interpreter.

[ Parent | on HN ]