Anthony Towns writes:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 06:13:31PM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> > > > Regarding (1): If you ask me how common the situation is that people
> > > > install local Python versions in /usr/local, then I will ask you how
> > > > common it is that it's reasonable that a script
Anthony Towns writes:
> Sure. Most scripts do. But we're not talking about most scripts,
> we're talking about python scripts, and a large number of those use
> /usr/bin/env. Of the 220 python scripts on my system, 202 of them use the
> /usr/bin/env trick. This includes scripts in /usr/doc/*/exampl
Gregor Hoffleit writes:
> Regarding (2): Making the dependency explicit (by using
> /usr/bin/python1.5) is just playing safe.
>
> As far as I can see, if we hadn't the legacy of the existing packages
> and installations, and if versioned dependencies would work on all
> systems in all situations,
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 06:13:31PM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> > > Regarding (1): If you ask me how common the situation is that people
> > > install local Python versions in /usr/local, then I will ask you how
> > > common it is that it's reasonable that a script provided by a Debian
> > > pac
On Wed, Oct 24, 2001 at 01:42:12AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 10:59:45PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
[...]
> Uh, how many scripts rely on python 1.5? If Debian's main python is 2.1,
> why should a python 1.5 script remain available? I can't see any reason
> for this, and
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:42:42 +0200
Gregor Hoffleit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (1) For once, #!/usr/bin/env has it's problems. Scripts that use
> "#!/usr/bin/env python" are more fragile than scripts without.
Also it's impossible to use flags like -u or -S with this syntax.
Alain
* Anthony Towns [011023 17:22]:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 02:42:42PM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> > Just to make the discussion a little bit more focussed: I think several
> > issues were mixed up in my original mail:
>
> Sounds like a plan.
>
> > (1) For once, #!/usr/bin/env has it's problem
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 10:59:45PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > Again, _why_ does this matter? Who does this? Is it even remotely common?
> > That people would even consider installing another version of python in
> > /usr/local surely just points to a problem with the Debian packaging, no?
> T
Neil Schemenauer wrote:
___
[wf:]
good morning
This is my first mail to this mailing list.
I use woody and potato. I use python for my coding. I am waiting to python-pyqt
under woody :-)
>
> > The problems with using "#!/usr/bin/python1.5" is threefold: first, it
> > make
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 02:42:42PM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> Just to make the discussion a little bit more focussed: I think several
> issues were mixed up in my original mail:
Sounds like a plan.
> (1) For once, #!/usr/bin/env has it's problems. Scripts that use
> "#!/usr/bin/env pytho
Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 08:32:33AM -0700, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> > Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 10:13:17AM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> > > > Say, you would install 2.1.2 in /usr/local.
> > > How about we just say "Don't install other versions of
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 02:42:42PM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> * Anthony Towns [011023 09:07]:
> > On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 01:31:50AM -0400, David M. Cooke wrote:
> > > At some point, Anthony Towns wrote:
[...]
> Just to make the discussion a little bit more focussed: I think several
> issues
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 01:27:22PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 08:32:33AM -0700, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> > Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 10:13:17AM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> > > > Say, you would install 2.1.2 in /usr/local.
> > > How about we
* Anthony Towns [011023 09:07]:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 01:31:50AM -0400, David M. Cooke wrote:
> > At some point, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > Again, _why_ does this matter? Who does this? Is it even remotely common?
> > > That people would even consider installing another version of python in
>
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 09:14:24AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Neil Schemenauer writes:
> > Matthias Klose wrote:
> > > - Recommend /usr/bin/env python over /usr/bin/python
> >
> > Again I must express my opposition to this idea. Using /usr/bin/env
> > totally breaks dependencies. There's no
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 01:33:29AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> 3.1. Version Independant Programs
> -
> Programs that can run with any version of Python must start with
> `#!/usr/bin/env python'. They must also specify a dependency on
> `python-base
Anthony Towns writes:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 08:32:33AM -0700, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> > Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 10:13:17AM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> > > > Say, you would install 2.1.2 in /usr/local.
> > > How about we just say "Don't install other versions of
Neil Schemenauer writes:
> Matthias Klose wrote:
> > - Recommend /usr/bin/env python over /usr/bin/python
>
> Again I must express my opposition to this idea. Using /usr/bin/env
> totally breaks dependencies. There's no way that I'm going to let
> Debian policy dictate what I can have in my path
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 01:31:50AM -0400, David M. Cooke wrote:
> At some point, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Again, _why_ does this matter? Who does this? Is it even remotely common?
> > That people would even consider installing another version of python in
> > /usr/local surely just points to a pro
At some point, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 08:32:33AM -0700, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> > Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 10:13:17AM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> > > > Say, you would install 2.1.2 in /usr/local.
> > > How about we just say "Don't install o
20 matches
Mail list logo
