Re: Distutils copyright

2000-06-29 Thread Matthias Klose
Greg Ward writes:
 > On 28 June 2000, Matthias Klose said:
 > > Thanks. I was packaging distutils for Debian before python1.6 hits the
 > > Debian archives.
 > 
 > For people with Python 1.5.2 installations, right?  (Obviously,
 > Distutils will be included with Python 1.6.)

Yes, Debian currently has 1.5.2 in all distributions (potato and
woody). The current distutils version will then be replaced with the
version included in 1.6.

 > BTW, what's the Debian policy (if any) for installing third-party
 > modules from a .deb package?  The only precedent I have noted is that
 > Red Hat puts the PyGTK interface into site-packages, which seems
 > reasonable.  It's a bit weird because it means a brand-spanking-new
 > installation has stuff in site-packages, but the alternatives seem
 > worse.  What's Debian's answer?

Currently most packages are put into a subdirectory of site-packages,
so you can determinate with one look, which file belongs to which
package (although there are other tools which do exactly this).

 > (Distutils-generated RPMs are the same as Red Hat's -- and if Distutils
 > grows a command to generate Debian packages, they really should act the
 > same as it RPMs!)

Debian is more strict in makeing packages (see the Debian packaging
manual and the debian policy).

http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/packaging.html/
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/

I am sure, that something more (than the package author thinks) needs
to be added to many packages to match Debian's policies.

For your interest I have added the debian subdirectory  for
distutils. As you can see, there is not much added to the standard
build procedures.

The question is: what exactly could be done to support the Debian
package format?

- make an option not to compile .py files (they are compiled when
  installing the package --> package gets smaller and you may compile
  with -O as well)
- install documentation; as you can see, I didn't put much effort in
  this. But the generation of html and pdf/ps documents could be
  eased. There are other files, which have to be copied manually.
- provide support for multiple binary packages. For example the pil
  source package is divided into four subpackages (python-imaging,
  python-imaging-tk, python-imaging-sane, python-imaging-doc), so that
  a sub package can be installed without all the dependent libraries.
  (For example python-imaging can be installed without having
  installed X). Other subpackages are used to separate the development
  files from the runtime files, or to put big documentation files in
  it's own subpackage.
- add dependency information (build-Dependencies and
  runtime-dependencies) that could be extracted to the debian/control
  file.



xxx
Description: Binary data


debian.tar.gz
Description: Binary data


thoughts on task-python-bundle

2000-06-29 Thread jpb
I recently installed potato on a laptop for someone uninterested in
installing emacs.  It was frustrating to not be able to install
task-python-bundle because he didn't want to waste space on his laptop
on python-elisp (and emacs and its dependencies)

Would there be major objections to making python-elisp either a
recommend or a suggests (I'm unclear on the precise one I want - where
it shows in dselect's dependency conflict/resolution screen but isn't a
hard dependency)?  

It'd be nice to be able to keep getting all the new python debs as
task-python-bundle's dependency list gets updated, but currently that
can't be done if you don't also have emacs on the machine.

jpb
-- 
Joe Block <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CREOL System Administrator

Social graces are the packet headers of everyday life.