On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 00:00:20 +0400, Дмитрий Сиваченко wrote: > On 10/5/12 9:23 AM, Дмитрий Сиваченко wrote: > > On 01.10.2012 21:39, Li-Wen Hsu wrote: > >> > >> Thanks for working on this, I am looking forward to your patch. > >> > > > > Hello, > > > > Please consider the attached patch for python2/python3 symlinks. > > As I proposed earlier in this thread, I think it is sane to make these > > symlinks > > for latest python2.X/python3.X versions only (this is what people should > > use by > > default in most cases). > > > > And let people explicitly run older versions if they really need them. > > Should I treat your silence as 'no objection'?
I have no objection, we're toward the same direction, and here is my patch: http://people.freebsd.org/~lwhsu/patch/python-major-version-link.diff Which does following things: - Remove "first-win" logic in Makefile, this generates conflicting packages. If we really need this, it should be implemented in another way. - Create symbolic links as PEP 394 [1] suggests. ${DEFAULT_PYTHON_VERSION} will create python and python${MAJOR_VERSION} links, for current default, python2.7 will create: python -> python2 -> python2.7 - Introduce PYTHON3_DEFAULT_VERSION, which will handle bin/python3 link. It is a bit hacky, but I don't have better idea at this point. And we might still need to change this to PYTHON2_DEFAULT_VERSION when we change default version to 3.x. I think it has better to be committed after freeze. Meanwhile, if you really want to have bin/python{2,3} in the tree, I would not object you commit your patch, since they are not conflicting. How does everyone think? [1] http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0394/ -- Li-Wen Hsu <lw...@freebsd.org> http://lwhsu.org
_______________________________________________ freebsd-python@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-python To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-python-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
