Hi, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes:
> Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> skribis: > >> What do you think of the attached patches? The first makes libxfce4ui >> only propagate the latest gtk+, so I added gtk+-2 where needed. The >> second removes “exo” from the “xfce” meta-package, because it doesn’t >> seem needed. “exo” propagates “gtk+-2”, so it would be hard to prevent >> the conflict otherwise. >> >> These patches are only a temporary fix until we can find a way to mark >> certain conflicts as unproblematic. > > These patches seem reasonable to me. > > Another option (perhaps slightly less intrusive) would be to implement > the ‘xfce’ meta-package using ‘union-build’ instead of > ‘propagated-inputs’. Yes, that’s better. I pushed two commits: gnu: libxfce4ui: Do not propagate gtk+-2. (b8d3a000efca885180277358caa3c4fe604168a5) gnu: xfce: Build union instead of propagating inputs. (c860d6ef235b47ec8181fbf390e0b42fbc95dcfe) With these two commits I can install xfce without problems. -- Ricardo GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC https://elephly.net
