[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: util-linux and perl rename

From: Alex Vong
Subject: Re: util-linux and perl rename
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 21:02:18 +0800
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux)

Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> writes:

> Alex Vong <address@hidden> writes:
>> Thorsten Wilms <address@hidden> writes:
>>> I already had a "rename" binary via util-linux. Then I installed the
>>> package "rename", resulting in another "rename" binary, as I prefer
>>> the Perl version. This was a success in that I got what I wanted.
>>> However, should this name clash be considered a bug?
>>> Is there a policy for such circumstances?
>>> What happens that the newly installed "rename" gets precedence?
>> I think it is chosen based on some random criterions
> It's not random, but rather a very simple criterion.  The packages
> listed first in the package manifest take priority over ones that come
> later.  If you don't use manifests, "guix package -i <pkg>" puts <pkg>
> at the top of the new manifest, even if it was already present in the
> previous manifest.
I see, so this explains how Thorsten managed to get the right rename
(not because of luck or magic...)

I personally had given up using the imprerative "install" interface and
switched using the declarative "manifest" interface. IMO, it makes it
clearer what I've installed and allows me quickly comment / un-comment
fail-to-build packages. With the imprerative interface, I've to remember
which fail-to-build packages I didn't upgrade last time.

So in fact we have a 3rd solution: to re-order the packages in your

>        Mark


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]