On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 11:02:01AM -0500, Simon Law wrote: > I suspect that the most correct thing is to change Zope such > that it expects it in an FHS-compatible place. For extra points, you > should change it such that it is configurable at compile-time.
I decided to make some (really simple) changes to the zope source to make it suppose binary .so modules be located in a separate directory; then i modified the z2.py source to insert the library directory in the head of its sys.path. Well, it seems to work, except for some errors i noticed in the $STUPID_LOG_FILE using Z_DEBUG_MODE=1. I've uploaded a 2.6.1-0.6 package for experimental distribution with that changes. A 2.6.1-0.5 was also uploaded to unstable with no delay; i forgot to add a postrm script to delete the zope user and group in the last upload. Please, test 2.6.1-0.5: if anything will work i'll propose the changes to the upstream. ciao, P.S.: I'm considering the opportunity to package ZEO for zope. Do you think i should go on? -- Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis | Elegant or ugly code as well aliases: Luca ^De [A-Z][-A-Za-z]*[iy]'?s$ | as fine or rude sentences have Infinite loop: see `Loop, infinite'. | something in common: they Loop, infinite: see `Infinite loop'. | don't depend on the language.
