[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Packaging applications with extensions modules

Hi Jakub (2013.02.16_14:01:58_+0200)
> C) Built the modules only for the default Python version and install
> them to a private directory (/usr/lib/PKGNAME/ or similar). This is
> what Python Policy tells us to do. I see the following problem with
> this approach:

This is my preferred approach, and I think we should deal with the

> - You can ship extensions only for one Python version. (Arguably
> that's not a big deal.)

Not a big deal because:
* 2.7 is the end of 2 (we hope)
* you can ship extensions for more than one 3.x version in the same
  private directory, thanks to tags
* we don't tend to have more than one 3.x version in the archive for
  long (thanks to easy transitions, but they are sure to get harder)

> - Unless you write the code yourself, there is no protection against
> loading extensions modules for a wrong Python version.

Not going to a problem with 3.x

> - dh_python2 (which, for some reason, everyone wants to use) doesn't
> generate §3.1.1-compliant dependency for such setup.

Yeah, we should fix that.

I don't think the problems with C are big enough to warrant changing the
policy. I think the approach is fairly sound.


Stefano Rivera
  H: +27 21 461 1230 C: +27 72 419 8559

Reply to: