Re: python again

[Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>]

John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> writes:

> Section 2.2.1 is totally, completely, utterly broken and stupid.  If I
> ever run into situations where I need to make Python packages, I do it
> the right way (python-foo depends on python2.3-foo, and also build
> python2.2-foo) instead of the broken way.  But for pure python programs,
> I just use python-foo and install them in /usr/lib/site-python.

While we're complaining about the current Python packages and installation
directories, another thing that would be nice to fix is that the current
distutils configuration causes modules installed separately by the user
using python setup.py install to end up in /usr/lib (with scripts in
/usr/bin), rather than in /usr/local, unless the user explicitly overrides
--prefix.  It would be nice to override --prefix by default so that user
installations go to the right location, at the cost of making Python
Debian package maintainers use an additional flag to put their packages in
/usr.

Since some of the proposals for changing the Python packaging would
require changes to all the packaged Python modules anyway, maybe this
could be done at the same time.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>