Re: Experimental Python packages
Gregor Hoffleit <gregor@mediasupervision.de> writes:
> Have you looked at my experimental Python packages, at
> http://people.debian.org/~flight/python/snapshot/ ?
I've had a look at these packages myself. Can you tell us what stage
they're at, i.e. what still needs to be done, what problems you know
about and what you want to hear about?
Some things I've noticed to start with:
- Lots of references to Python 1.5 or 2.0.
- python2.1-base tries to install an alternative for /usr/bin/python
in its postinst, so it has to conflict with old versions of
python-base that contain this.
- The shlibs file refers to "python2-base (>= 2.1-1)" but the package
is python2.1-base.
- /usr/bin/pydoc isn't versioned, so python2.2-base will have to
conflict with this version of python2.1-base. It should probably
be /usr/bin/pydoc2.1 with a "pydoc" alternative, and start with
#!/usr/bin/python2.x as appropriate, for future versions.
I'd also like to know:
- What dependencies should packaged modules declare:
a) when the maintainer only plans on supported whatever the
latest version of Python is?
b) if there'll be one package per Python version?
- What should packages that use Python depend on? Presumably
"python" if the maintainer feels optimistic, otherwise
python2.1-base.
--
Carey Evans http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/c.evans/
You think you know... what's to come... what you are.
Reply to: