> Now filed as
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=pydbg-removal;users=debian-python@lists.debian.org
why "Severity: serious"? none of them violates the policy:
https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities; please adjust to
normal or important. thanks
--
Sandro "morph" Tosi
M
ython stack, without having to rebuild the whole stack.
>>>> There
>>>> are several solutions how to simplify the packaging, I'm not sure how much
>>>> the
>>>> dbg extensions are still used ... There are several scenarios:
>>>>
>&g
tions how to simplify the packaging, I'm not sure how much
>>> the
>>> dbg extensions are still used ... There are several scenarios:
>>>
>>> - Keep the current setup (-dbg packages need to be available to
>>> run them).
>>>
>>&
Python stack, without having to rebuild the whole stack. There
are several solutions how to simplify the packaging, I'm not sure how much the
dbg extensions are still used ... There are several scenarios:
- Keep the current setup (-dbg packages need to be available to
run them).
- Allo
bugging of stuff in modules
> further down the Python stack, without having to rebuild the whole stack.
> There
> are several solutions how to simplify the packaging, I'm not sure how much the
> dbg extensions are still used ... There are several scenarios:
>
> - Keep the cu
Hi Matthias!
On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 08:33:39PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Python 3.8 upstream now has a common ABI for normal and debug extension
> builds, so it is technically possible to load a debug extension in
> the normal interpreter, or to load a normal extension in the debug
> interpr
whole stack. There
are several solutions how to simplify the packaging, I'm not sure how much the
dbg extensions are still used ... There are several scenarios:
- Keep the current setup (-dbg packages need to be available to
run them).
- Allow the debug interpreter to load normal
Hello, it seems that dependencies are not generated for the -dbg packages by
dh_python[23]
Is there s way to ask dh_python to generate these dependencies from the
build-dep of a package.
Thanks
Frederic
The packages built for the Python debug interpreters should not be stripped.
Usually this has to be done on a per package basis, however when converting to
the pybuild system, this is easily missed. It is now documented in [1], but I
assume a lot of packages just strip the -dbg packages. Maybe
On Apr 04 2015, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Nikolaus Rath, 2015-04-04]
>> > In the process of converting it to pybuild, you've droppped the dh_strip
>> > override. Bring it back and the debug symbols should be back in -dbg.
>>
>> I certainly did so, because I expected that pybuild would take care o
[Nikolaus Rath, 2015-04-04]
> > In the process of converting it to pybuild, you've droppped the dh_strip
> > override. Bring it back and the debug symbols should be back in -dbg.
>
> I certainly did so, because I expected that pybuild would take care of
> this. My question is: why is pybuild not d
On Apr 02 2015, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> On 2015-04-01 20:15:04, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I recently switched the python-llfuse package to use pybuild. However,
>> this seems to have a side effect that the debugging symbols for the C
>> extension are no longer included in the -dbg pac
On 2015-04-01 20:15:04, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I recently switched the python-llfuse package to use pybuild. However,
> this seems to have a side effect that the debugging symbols for the C
> extension are no longer included in the -dbg package, so it now contains
> only the extension buil
Hi,
I recently switched the python-llfuse package to use pybuild. However,
this seems to have a side effect that the debugging symbols for the C
extension are no longer included in the -dbg package, so it now contains
only the extension build for the debug interpreter. Is that deliberate?
I think
Baz should be translated to
python-baz-dbg or skipped (as python-bar already depends on python-baz)
i.e. if Baz is a pure Python module or an extension, so I cannot use
requires.txt data anyway (crazy idea: Provide: python-foo-dbg packages
in packages with pure Python foo modules and no extensions)
* Piotr Ożarowski , 2011-08-10, 11:55:
I remember a discussion about dh_python2 supporting -dbg packages
here. Therefore, I was thinking that it could handle some steps,
like dependencies (in ${python:Depends}) and install (keep only
debug files).
dh_python2 cleans -dbg packages
What do you
[Jakub Wilk, 2011-08-10]
> * Piotr Ożarowski , 2011-08-10, 10:39:
> >>I remember a discussion about dh_python2 supporting -dbg packages
> >>here. Therefore, I was thinking that it could handle some steps,
> >>like dependencies (in ${python:Depends}) and inst
* Piotr Ożarowski , 2011-08-10, 10:39:
I remember a discussion about dh_python2 supporting -dbg packages
here. Therefore, I was thinking that it could handle some steps, like
dependencies (in ${python:Depends}) and install (keep only debug
files).
dh_python2 cleans -dbg packages
What do
[Vincent Bernat, 2011-08-10]
> I remember a discussion about dh_python2 supporting -dbg packages
> here. Therefore, I was thinking that it could handle some steps, like
> dependencies (in ${python:Depends}) and install (keep only debug files).
dh_python2 cleans -dbg package
python-support, but there are only
> a few pysupport-specific bits, of course. If you don't follow it
> blindly, but read it with understanding, you should be fine.
I remember a discussion about dh_python2 supporting -dbg packages
here. Therefore, I was thinking that it could
* Vincent Bernat , 2011-08-09, 08:49:
Is this page up-to-date?
http://wiki.debian.org/Python/DbgBuilds
Does dh_python2 handle this part itself now?
Which part?
The document assumes you use dh and python-support, but there are only a
few pysupport-specific bits, of course. If you don't follow
Hi!
Is this page up-to-date?
http://wiki.debian.org/Python/DbgBuilds
Does dh_python2 handle this part itself now?
--
Vincent Bernat ☯ http://vincent.bernat.im
Make input easy to proofread.
- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)
pgpB8brVrfl7W.pgp
Description: PG
Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> with debhelper >= 7.3.5 it is possible to build Python extensions and -dbg
> packages, as long as they come with a distutils/setuptools based setup.py.
In case you're looking for examples: python-usb and python-cjson use the new dh
now. python-cjson builds
Hi,
with debhelper >= 7.3.5 it is possible to build Python extensions and -dbg
packages, as long as they come with a distutils/setuptools based setup.py.
By default dh will call setup.py with all requested Python versions, starting
with /usr/bin/python aka. the default Python version (if it
On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 11:35:37AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > Did they ever actually run the tests then?
> >
> >
> no clue, I know why I'm not using suse ;)
Yep, having ZEO lock up on you after an upgrade wouldn't be fun.
> > http://archives.free.net.ph/message/20070616.183425.b42a7509.en
> Did they ever actually run the tests then?
>
>
no clue, I know why I'm not using suse ;)
> http://archives.free.net.ph/message/20070616.183425.b42a7509.en.html#zope-zodb-dev
>
> That mail was just over a month ago.
>
as I understand one of the mails in the thread this problem seems to be
On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 11:51:09PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>
> > python version for lenny. Still hoping to drop support for 2.4 once a
> > zope2.x version supporting 2.5 is released...
>
> Today I heard that opensuse run Zope with python 2.5 since Zope version
> 2.9.4. Did anybody ever try
> python version for lenny. Still hoping to drop support for 2.4 once a
> zope2.x version supporting 2.5 is released...
Today I heard that opensuse run Zope with python 2.5 since Zope version
2.9.4. Did anybody ever try to run Zope in 2.5? If there's something not
working, we should take care o
lease email me if you want help in
extracting/applying the patch for the Debian package.
Since sarge we do build pythonX.Y-dbg packages, which hold the python
interpreter build --with-pydebug. Extensions need to be rebuilt to be
loadable with this debug build. Some extension modules have been
re
29 matches
Mail list logo
