Hello Nicolas, you wrote:
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 10:50:13PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:* Paul Boddie<paul@boddie.org.uk>, 2011-11-12, 15:08:c) I renamed "Nuitka.py" to a "nuitka" binary. I am keeping the drop-in replacement as "Python" though.I don't think it's wise to call it "Python",Agreed, this is bad idea.+1 What's wrong with calling nuitka, nuitka ? I do not remember PyPy, Stackless, Jython, IronPython or any other alternative Python interpreters trying to install their executable under the name /usr/bin/python, so why would you want to do it in this case ?
For the record, the package installs "/usr/bin/Python" which uses "/usr/bin/python" in its "#!" line.
I just got accustomed to it, you know like when you develop something over years, and cannot think of anything else.
The "/usr/bin/nuitka" binary is not that one, "Python" is intended to be a "behave alike python just be faster in a cached way". And "nuitka" shall be the "do one of many things" binary.
I might remove it from the Debian package, or put it to "/usr/share/doc/nuitka/examples" and then mention it in a "README.Debian".
The "Python" does not accept "python" alike options anyway yet, it's not finished if you wish.
I absolutely don't want "Python" to block the entry of "nuitka" to Debian proper. Oh collective Debian-Python Brainpower, tell me a good name but "nuitka" for said binary. :-)
PS: Thank you for working on Nuitka, it looks really interesting.
Thanks a lot too. Kay