Re: Python modules for every supported version
Jim Penny <email@example.com> writes:
> On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:27:23 -0700
> Matt Zimmerman <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> I still do not see why supporting N versions of Python should require
>> N+1 binary packages (or even N). Why can't they be byte-compiled
>> after installation for all available versions of Python?
> Suppose package foo is installed. It requires byte compilation. When
> installed, python2.2 is on the user's box. It is possible to discover
> the set of pythons on a user's machine, but somewhat nasty.
> Now, suppose that python2.3 is later installed. How does the
> installation procedure for python2.3 discover that it can (and should)
> bytecompile foo? Certainly it is a much nastier problem, and will, at
> best, lead to a very slow installation process for python2.3.
Don't the emacsen already do this?
You win again, gravity!