Re: Proposed update to the python policy
On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 10:39:45AM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> > Ugh, it should fail *regardless* of the existence of python2.X-dev. Why
> > would you ever call it "current" if it's building for something that *isn't*
> > the current version of python? A package should only be called "python-foo"
> > if it's built for "python"; if it's built for python2.X explicitly, the
> > package name needs to reflect that, which means manual changes are needed to
> > update it for a new python version. That's out of scope for 'current'.
> when I write "current" I mean "single" (I didn't choose name for this
> keyword)
The name 'current' was chosen deliberately, to refer to building for *only*
the current/default version of python.
> If package is build for a single Python version and default Python
> version is not supported by this package, hashbang has to be set
> correctly and modules it provides (byte-)compiled (at build time *and*
> during the install/default python version change)
Yes, and then that has nothing to do with current.
> > > BTW: "current, >=2.4" helped me a lot with packaging gaupol when
> > > python2.3 was default
> > Which is not an arch: any package, so is irrelevant to binNMU support.
> I couldn't set "python" in hashbang (as I said before: gaupol will not work
> with python2.3). Package was build when python2.3 was default so
> hashbang was set to python2.4. Now when python2.3 was removed from
> Debian, package needed binNMU (due to wrong hashbang) even if it's
> arch:all.
No, it needed an *update* when python2.3 was removed. BinNMUs a) are for
arch: any packages only (this is for a reason), and b) not an appropriate
method for changing things like the python hashbang used in a script, which
is something that should be evaluated on a per-package basis.
> > Oh, and if gaupol really needs python 2.4 or better, then the package's
> > current dependencies are wrong...
> python2.4 is default now so there's no need to add extra dependencies
Um, no. Your package is supposed to have a versioned dependency on python
(>= 2.4), and it doesn't.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: