[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Move to python 2.4 / Changing the packaging style for python packages

also sprach Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de> [2006.06.13.0149 +0200]:
>  - The current pythonX.Y-foo packages having modules in the python
>    library path are collapsed into one package python-foo. Binary
>    independent modules are made available for the python versions
>    currently supported in the distribution.  Binary dependent
>    extensions are put for all supported python versions into the
>    same python-foo package.  The overhead for a maybe unused

Python will create optimised, binary dependent modules on first
access to .py files, right? In our case, though, this fails because
/usr is mostly read-only to those running Python.

Couldn't Python be extended to store .pyc files in /var?

Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
 .''`.     martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :'  :    proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
micro$oft windoze - the best solitaire game you can buy.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)

Reply to: