Re: Complied into debs please (Python/Emacs packagers take note)

[Malcolm Parsons <malcolm@ivywell.screaming.net>]

On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 03:11:41PM +0000, Adam Olsen wrote:
> And in the middle you have the current method, which only suffers from
> the minor issues of the .py[co] files not being known to dpkg, and
> taking slightly longer to install.  Compared to the alternatives, I
> think it beats them hands down.

I can't see the advantage of having both .pyc and .pyo

If the optimisations make that much difference, then they should always
be used and the .pyc is redundant.

If they make no difference, then there's no point having them.