how to improve simple python shell script (to compile list of files)

[Jari Aalto]

[Keep CC, thank you]

Please suggest comments how can I make this script to work 
from bash. Also how can I skip better the [0] argument from
command line without hte extra variable i?

#!/bin/bash

function compile ()
{
python -c '
import os, sys, py_compile;
i = 0;
for arg in sys.argv:
file  = os.path.basename(arg);
dir   = os.path.dirname(arg);
i += 1;
if i > 1  and os.path.exists(dir):
os.chdir(dir);
print "compiling %s\n" % (file);
py_compile.compile(file);
'  $*
}

compile $(find path/to -type f -name "*.py")

# End of example

The error message reads:

  File "", line 2
import os, sys, py_compile;
^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax

Jari

-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: how to improve simple python shell script (to compile list of files)

[Jari Aalto]

"Fredrik Lundh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Jari Aalto wrote:
>
| > Please suggest comments how can I make this script to work
| > from bash.
>
> replace it with a call to the compileall module?
>
> $ python -mcompileall [directory...]

Thanks, but that will not work. The files are gathered from discrete
places and I'd need advice why the simple -c options does
not accept the code inside parentheses.

Are there some restrictions in Python to use only "all in one line"? I
mean:

python -c "command; command ...; command; ..."


Jari

-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: how to improve simple python shell script (to compile list of files)

[Jari Aalto]

"Chris F.A. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On 2005-10-15, Jari Aalto wrote:
>Don't indent:
>
> function compile ()
> {
>  python -c '
> import os, sys, py_compile;
> i = 0;
> for arg in sys.argv:
>   file  = os.path.basename(arg);
>   dir   = os.path.dirname(arg);
>   i += 1;
>   if i > 1  and os.path.exists(dir):
>   os.chdir(dir);
>   print "compiling %s\n" % (file);
>   py_compile.compile(file);
>   '  $*
> }

Thanks, is there equivalent to this Perl statement in Python?

   @list = @ARGV[1 .. @ARGV];

or something similar so that I could avoid the 1 > 1 (sys.argv) check
altogether?

Jari

-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

distutils - Is is possible to install without the .py extensions

[Jari Aalto]

Given following setup.py stanza:

#!/usr/bin/python

from distutils.core import setup
import glob

setup(name='program',
  description='',
  keywords='',
  version='',
  url='',
  download_url='',
  license='',
  author='',
  author_email='',
  long_description="""
  """,
  scripts = ['program,py'],
  packages = ['''],
  )

Is there any way to fix the installation (postinstall or something), so
that the the result is:

/usr/bin/program

instead of:

/usr/bin/program.py

Jari

-- 
Welcome to FOSS revolution: we fix and modify until it shines

-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: distutils - Is is possible to install without the .py extensions

[Jari Aalto]

* Fri 2008-03-07 Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> gmane.comp.python.general
* Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Jari Aalto wrote:
>> #!/usr/bin/python
>> 
>> from distutils.core import setup
>> import glob
>> 
>> setup(name='program',
...
>>   scripts = ['program,py'],
>>   )
>> that the the result is:
>> 
>> /usr/bin/program
>> 
>> instead of:
>> 
>> /usr/bin/program.py
>
> The easiest and best way is to just rename the file in your source tree to 
> "program" and be done with it.

Is there any other way? This is the source package that I would like
to keep intact and just patch the setup.py

Jari

-- 
Welcome to FOSS revolution: we fix and modify until it shines

-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: distutils - Is is possible to install without the .py extensions

[Jari Aalto]

* Fri 2008-03-07 Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> gmane.comp.python.general
* Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 setup(name='program',
>> ...
   scripts = ['program,py'],
   )
 that the the result is:

 /usr/bin/program

 instead of:

 /usr/bin/program.py
>>>
>>> The easiest and best way is to just rename the file in your source tree to 
>>> "program" and be done with it.
>> 
>> Is there any other way? This is the source package that I would like
>> to keep intact and just patch the setup.py
>
> Not really, no. Why is it so important to only patch the setup.py
> file and not any others?

It has to do with generating a diff against the original package. If
the file is moved:

mv file.py file

prior setup.py run (which, according to answers, would have a change
to <>), the problem is the generated diff
against original sources:

+ would flag removal of 'file.py'
+ inclusion of 'file'

The ideal would be if setup.py could do all the destination install
"postwork". The generated patch would be clean and only contain
changes in setup.py.

But I understand, if distutils does not support stripping the
extensions during install. It just cacuses exra work for utility
packagers.

Jari

-- 
Welcome to FOSS revolution: we fix and modify until it shines

-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list