Re: Bug#175225: pyslsk: (non-fatal) error in postinst
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 09:14:40AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> There is currently a fragility in dh_python, which can trigger
> compilation of python modules belonging to other packages. This should
> not happen and I'll correct this soon. However, that's not sufficient to
> explain the bug : pyslsk's postinst tries to bytecompile eroaster's .py
> modules - which eroaster should have done in its own postinst - and
> python fails to bytecompile ecat.py because of the ^M character. Maybe
> it's a bug in python, but I guess replacing ^M with \r should do the
> trick.
Uhm, well. Should these files be byte compiled. Having looked at the
proposed Debian Python policy with regards to python programs extra modules
used by the program is not discussed. These extra modules are only for the
use of eroaster and do not form part of a module package. Should they in
fact be in /usr/lib/eroaster which is where they were until someone told me
policy said they should be in /usr/lib/site-python/eroaster.
>From the FHS:
"/usr/lib includes object files, libraries, and internal binaries
that are not intended to be executed directly by users or shell
scripts."
I'm getting conflicting views here, what is the consensus on the location of
python module files only used by packaged program?
Regards,
Rob
--
Rob 'robster' Bradford
http://robster.org.uk
Reply to: