Re: Packaging pypy
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> wrote:
> Hi Gustavo (2011.11.28_18:32:52_+0200)
>> Would someone here be able to give a hand to Maciej on pushing that
>> integration forward?
>
> I'm interested in this, and happy to help. It's probably time to get
> PyPy back into Debian, I think all of our amd64 and i386 buildds are big
> enough to handle it these days. How do people feel about the other
> concerns raised by lamby (CCed, don't know if he still follows this
> list) when he removed it?
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/538858:
>> One day we can look at packaging this again, but it's not helpful to
>> Debian in its current state - it is too premature to have in unstable
>> and has some issues that would be difficult to fix. Development is also
>> difficult due to the long build times and buildd specifications
>> required.
>>
>> It has a very low popcon - anyone with a non-trivial interest in this
>> project would be using upstream's HEAD anyway.
>
> Of course, it would have to be packaged as a separate Python stack,
> again. Although it would be interesting to allow modules to be built for
> alternate Python implementations, but that's not a trivial project...
>
> SR
>
> --
> Stefano Rivera
> http://tumbleweed.org.za/
> H: +27 21 465 6908 C: +27 72 419 8559 UCT: x3127
For what is worth, the .py files (but not the .pyc files) can be
shared among pypy and cpython. However some packages have different
installation process for pypy and not pypy build (for example building
optional C extensions or not). For what is worth, pypy also follows
3149 (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3149/) so it won't
automatically try to load CPython compiled .so files (but it'll try
and fail to load the .pyc files).
Reply to: