>>>>> "SB" == Sérgio Basto <ser...@serjux.com> writes:

SB> Maybe better is remove /usr/bin/python , it will force people fix
SB> the path , instead of a silent move .

That's just a more extreme version of what is being proposed here.

The proposal moves the /usr/bin/python symlink to a separate package.
If your package really needs it at build or runtime, you would need to
manually add the appropriate BuildRequires: or Requires: (unless of
course rpm auto-adds one).

I guess the point is two-fold: Packagers have to go through an extra
step when they don't comply with the existing packaging guidelines,, and
it is now easier to see what actually calls "/usr/bin/python" in
contravention of the packaging guidelines.  The underlying fact is the
same: if /usr/bin/python is missing, your packages currently must still
build.  If they don't they're already not meeting the requirements.  If
they do then, well, this change would have no effect on you.

The problem I see is that this new package is nearly always going to
have to be installed on any running system because end users rightfully
expect /usr/bin/python to be there.  So I expect the only good coming
from this would be the ease in finding packages which require
/usr/bin/python in order to build.  That seems sufficiently positive to
me.

 - J<
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/WSX7WUWBTPI4QWHQLVUFBDSRCKSOR6RV/

Reply via email to