Re: Move to python 2.4 / Changing the packaging style for python packages
martin f krafft writes:
> also sprach Matthias Klose <email@example.com> [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?
how would that be different? make that directory in /var world