Re: python-central vs python-support
On Tue, 06 Jun 2006, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > > The 'Provides: python2.3-foo, python2.4-foo' is missing for all
> > > packages with private modules and scripts (without shared modules).
> > > For that case we do need XB-Python-Version. If we do want to drop the
> > > Provides for packages where they are not needed, we need it for shared
> > > modules as well.
> >
> > What for? Modules are automatically available to all python versions
> > (except those which do not support all versions, but then we can't do
> > better...).
>
> please read again. I'm not talking about shared modules.
I've read "If we do want to drop the Provides for packages where they are
not needed, we need it for shared modules as well."
It's that part that I'm questioning.
> > > > Don't you think this new field and Provides are redondant, and that you
> > > > could decide which rebuilds are necessary from it ?
> > >
> > > no, not for packages with private extensions.
>
> ... or private modules.
>
> > Does this kind of package exist? (ie do you have an example?)
>
> i.e. zope2.x
>
> we have to keep that information for packages with private modules
> using a non-standard version of python as well.
What's the problem with private modules ?
AFAIK the only "issue" is handling of bytecompilation and this problem is
already under control by the packages which really benefit from
bytecompilation.
Am I wrong? If yes, what do we want to improve?
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
Reply to: