I received this from the NetBSD and OpenBSD maintainers. José, is there
something
we can do about python?
JMarc
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: About LyX (Net|Open)BSD and wchar_t
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 18:15:15 -0400
From: Zvezdan Petkovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Jul 5, 2007, at 4:08 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>>>>>> "Jeremy" == Jeremy C Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Jeremy> I won't be able to check this for about three weeks. Thanks
> Jeremy> for the email and I will try to reply in a few weeks.
>
> That's OK, I just wanted to spare you a fez hours of debugging :)
>
> JMarc
Marc, I'm in a pretty much same situation.
I currently do not have an OpenBSD machine running X at all (only a
headless server). I planned to install it through VMware on my new
laptop long time ago but a recent change of job has consumed all my
time. I hope to get to this soon.
However, I had an issue with LyX back in April. Namely, python files
in LyX have hardcoded python in the top line #! /usr/bin/env python.
To allow multiple Python installations on the same machine OpenBSD
asks the user to make the symbolic link to the one they want as a
default. It installs Python as python2.4 or python2.5 (perhaps
without the dot).
Unfortunately, there is no guarantee that a user will make a link
from, say, /usr/local/bin/python2.4 to /usr/local/bin/python.
On such an installation a build of LyX port would fail (I did not
notice this before until notified by another port maintainer because
I always have that link).
Is there a chance that these LyX python scripts begin using the value
found during configuration (because it does find python2.4) instead
of hard coding python in the top line?
Best regards,
Zvezdan
