On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 21:51 +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
> On Mon, 21.09.2009 at 12:13:46 +0200, Wolodja Wentland
> wrote:
Note
Let me first say one thing.
I actually planned to write a big "thank you for the discussion" mail
this evening, because I really had the feeling that I as
Hi,
On Mon, 21.09.2009 at 12:13:46 +0200, Wolodja Wentland
wrote:
> Hmmm, no. Python applications that need a specific version of Python
> should use
>
> #!/usr/bin/env pythonX.Y
>
> or
>
> #!/usr/bin/pythonX.Y
>
> stating that they need this specific version of Python.
how else is
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 14:07 +0200, Siegfried Gevatter wrote:
> 2009/9/21 Josselin Mouette :
> >> Maybe the applications
> >> using /usr/bin/env should get a bug filled, I agree with that.
> Can someone explain again what is it that we are gong to gain by
> patching like 50% of all applications?
2009/9/21 Josselin Mouette :
>> Maybe the applications
>> using /usr/bin/env should get a bug filled, I agree with that.
Can someone explain again what is it that we are gong to gain by
patching like 50% of all applications?
--
Siegfried-Angel Gevatter Pujals (RainCT)
Free Software Developer
Le lundi 21 septembre 2009 à 08:36 +0100, Floris Bruynooghe a écrit :
> This is indeed desired and the policy says to use /usr/bin/python, for
> reasons explained in this thread already. Maybe the applications
> using /usr/bin/env should get a bug filled, I agree with that.
Given their number, t
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 08:36 +0100, Floris Bruynooghe wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:35:19AM +0200, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 22:18 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > > Wolodja Wentland wrote:
>> I really don't get it. How could it possibly be better to have a
>> wild
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:35:19AM +0200, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 22:18 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > Wolodja Wentland wrote:
>
> [ placed on top because this is the main point ]
>
> > > If however the *env python scheme is enforced in the policy the problems
> > > I o
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 23:49 +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Wolodja Wentland, 2009-09-20]
> > On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 20:52 +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> >>[Wolodja Wentland, 2009-09-20]
> >>> To give a somewhat extreme example. A user could decide to install a new
> >>> Python version within
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 22:18 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> Wolodja Wentland wrote:
[ placed on top because this is the main point ]
> > If however the *env python scheme is enforced in the policy the problems
> > I outlined in my original post are solved without additional problems
> > (?). If t
[Wolodja Wentland, 2009-09-20]
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 20:52 +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>>[Wolodja Wentland, 2009-09-20]
>>> To give a somewhat extreme example. A user could decide to install a new
>>> Python version within /usr/local - which i think is commonly done with
>>> Python 2.6 these
Wolodja Wentland wrote:
> I can see your need as a python application maintainer to be *sure* that
> the python version distributed with debian is used to run that program.
Exactly.
> But the '/usr/bin/env python' scheme will result in exactly that
> behaviour if the administrator/user has not i
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 20:52 +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> If user/administrator is not following FHS and touching files outside
> /usr/local, it's his problem. /usr/local and /etc is where administrator
> can do his changes/improvements.
I completely agree! Did I give you reason to believe tha
[Wolodja Wentland, 2009-09-20]
> I can see your need as a python application maintainer to be *sure* that
> the python version distributed with debian is used to run that program.
> But the '/usr/bin/env python' scheme will result in exactly that
> behaviour if the administrator/user has not intent
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 19:05 +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Wolodja Wentland, 2009-09-20]
> > On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 18:42 +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> > > IMHO /usr/bin/python should be a rule and "/usr/bin/env python" - (very
> > > rare) exception (ipython or paster might qualify here)
> >
[Wolodja Wentland, 2009-09-20]
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 18:42 +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> > IMHO /usr/bin/python should be a rule and "/usr/bin/env python" - (very
> > rare) exception (ipython or paster might qualify here)
>
> Could you elaborate on the reasons for that? I am really intereste
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 18:42 +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> IMHO /usr/bin/python should be a rule and "/usr/bin/env python" - (very
> rare) exception (ipython or paster might qualify here)
Could you elaborate on the reasons for that? I am really interested and
it is my impression that enforcing
[Wolodja Wentland, 2009-09-20]
> Statistics
> ==
>
> I can not generate an overview over all python applications, but the
> following numbers give an overview on the schemes employed on *my*
> system:
>
> Programs in /usr/bin
>
>
> #!/usr/bin/env python 43 pro
On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 13:08 +0200, Andrea Gasparini wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm searching for some pointers of discussions about python shebang.
> My main consideration is that if I want to install another python
> installation or another interpreter (say for example jython,
> ironpython, or
> unladenswal
Hi,
I'm searching for some pointers of discussions about python shebang.
My main consideration is that if I want to install another python
installation or another interpreter (say for example jython, ironpython, or
unladenswallow ... ) I can't use it for all python programs, because every
updat
19 matches
Mail list logo
