Re: question about packaging a python-based software that ships a shared object library file

Hello Paul, On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:53:04AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > > I'm doing what you propose with fonttools and I like the solution. > > If upstream is shipping it as a private extension, keeping it that way > is a good idea. Great, then, I'll package the software this way and let you

Re: question about packaging a python-based software that ships a shared object library file

I'm doing what you propose with fonttools and I like the solution. If upstream is shipping it as a private extension, keeping it that way is a good idea. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubsc

question about packaging a python-based software that ships a shared object library file

Greetings, this is my first message to this list. Thanks in advance for your patience, as I'm no python connoisseur :) I am currently packaging a software (mmass) that's developed in python. Until recently, that packaging work was rather easy, as the software did only contain python modules (.py