Looking at this commit here: https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=2f63a06672fc2d739428ceeb6764d4ac2aad6256 I wonder if the blocker is still needed on both sides. In my tests I did not see any collisions anymore. Would be great if my findings are true. That would it make it a lot more easy for users to install lutris. Reproducible: Always
sys-apps/file[python] installs a module called "magic.py" in site-packages. dev-python/python-magic installs a directory called "magic" in site-packages. Although they don't directly collide, you'll see very strange behavior if both are installed at the same time.
Can you define "very strange behavior" here. Sounds arbitrary to me. Can we investigate this further and resolve it?
It can only be resolved if one of the packages renames it's python module.
After a quick test, it looks like python loads packages before modules. In other words, "import magic" will load site-packages/magic/__init__.py, and ignore site-packages/magic.py. This behavior is probably not obvious to your average python programmer.
What Mike said. Permitting both packages to be installed simultaneously would mean that one would be used and the other ignored. Now imagine that some packages depends on sys-apps/file[magic]. If one installs dev-python/python-magic, it "magically" replaces it and the app suddenly stops working correctly.
Thanks for explaining it. I now understand the QA issue here. Shouldn't such a problem be reported upstream?
(In reply to Joost Ruis from comment #6) > Thanks for explaining it. I now understand the QA issue here. > Shouldn't such a problem be reported upstream? https://github.com/ahupp/python-magic/issues/21 FWICS upstream pretty much assumes his package can replace the one from sys-apps/file, and the only revdeps of sys-apps/file[python] can use either package. Perhaps the simplest solution would be to remove USE=python from sys-apps/file, or rename it so it is less likely to be enabled accidentally. @base-system, WDYT?
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #7) > (In reply to Joost Ruis from comment #6) > > Thanks for explaining it. I now understand the QA issue here. > > Shouldn't such a problem be reported upstream? > > https://github.com/ahupp/python-magic/issues/21 > > FWICS upstream pretty much assumes his package can replace the one from > sys-apps/file, and the only revdeps of sys-apps/file[python] can use either > package. > > Perhaps the simplest solution would be to remove USE=python from > sys-apps/file, or rename it so it is less likely to be enabled accidentally. > @base-system, WDYT? I guess I'd prefer it masked (and then, less preferably, renamed) in case we want to test it out at some point. Keywording done.
