Bruce Sass wrote:
> The python-base package gives me python->python2.1, from Python-2.1.1.
> What happens when I point python to python3.0, will pydoc still work.
What happens when I point /usr/bin/perl to Perl 4? I think I've just
screwed up the system pretty badly. Use /usr/local for site specific
customizations. Don't screw with /usr/bin/python.
> Why should Debian decide that bin/python _must_be_ a specific version
> of Python when it is so simple to specify which python a executable
> needs. "Gratuitous" is the only word I can think of that accurately
> describes behaviour like that.
What's wrong with /usr/local/bin/python?
> Pydoc is part of Python, so there should be no problem explicitly
> specifying which Python that is (it is not limiting in any way).
>
> The experimental py-2.1 packages have:
>
> 1) #/usr/bin/env python2
>
> it should be:
>
> 2) #/usr/bin/env python2.1
No, it should be:
#!/usr/bin/python2.1
You can't use /usr/bin/env. What happens if someone installs python2.1
somewhere else in the path and that version does not have the modules
that the script needs? You should use "#!/usr/bin/env python" for
scripts that you write or locally install scripts. That way you can
change /usr/local/bin/python to point to a newer version of Python and
everything starts using that new version.
> you (Neil) want:
>
> 3) #/usr/bin/python
>
> I like 2) because it lets me have a /usr/local/bin/python2.1
> overshadow the packaged 2.1 if I want, simply by fiddling with
> symlinks in /usr/local/bin. If every executable did that I could
> point python to whatever I wanted and things just work.
Things would not work. Things would break. How do we assure that the
locally installed Python is compatible with all the installed Python
packages?
> ...where has my thinking failed?
For some reason you insist on being able to change /usr/bin/python. If
you give up on that everything is simple and works fine.
Neil
