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

Re: Python 2.6? A Python transition?

Le jeudi 27 août 2009 à 19:05 -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : 
> >       * fixing paths from site-packages to *-packages (since the path
> >         now depends on the Python version, yay)
> I may be confused by this, but so far as I can tell, I don't have to do
> anything for this to work for the module I'm looking at.  Under what
> circumstances would you expect for a package to need to be modified to
> deal with this?

Some valid cases: 
      * several binaries, list /usr/lib/python2.Y/site-packages in
      * rm -f
      * dh_link ... /usr/lib/python2.Y/site-packages/foo/foo.ttf 
      * any kind of useful thing the maintainer can do with the modules

Some invalid cases I have seen in the archive: 
      * rm -f .../site-packages/*.la (or *.pyc) 
      * mv .../site-packages .../pyshared/blah 
      * any kind of other stupid thing the maintainer invented

> The package I'm looking at is a package for a client and server
> application that also builds Perl, Python, and PHP bindings for its client
> library, so the Makefile machinery is more complex than just using
> distutils and needs the bits of glue pushed into its build machinery.  But
> I think I have it sorted out, apart from not being positive it's going to
> work with 2.6.

Indeed, it’s not a problem for packages not using distutils, since most
of them already handle prefixes correctly.

 .''`.      Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `'   “I recommend you to learn English in hope that you in
  `-     future understand things”  -- Jörg Schilling

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=

Reply to: