G'day debian-python,
Just read the DWN, saw mention of the Python policy, read it, and subscribed to
this list to throw in some comments. I note that the policy was posted some
time ago, so these comments might be too late.
First off, you need to clarify what you are attempting to achieve. Ther
On Sat, Sep 29, 2001 at 11:17:19PM -0700, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > First off, you need to clarify what you are attempting to achieve. There
> > are
> > three possibile aims as I see it;
> >
> > 1) single "official" version o
On Sat, Sep 29, 2001 at 11:31:44PM -0700, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> Packages (mostly) conforming to this policy are at:
[...]
> - Packaged modules should depend on python-api-X.Y
>
> - Remove section on legacy versions of Python (they are
> independent). I should probably add a sect
On Sat, Sep 29, 2001 at 11:10:43PM -0700, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> Carey Evans wrote:
> > By way of example, suppose I have a package "spam" that embeds Python
> > 2.1, and therefore depends on python-2.1. spam also uses the "eggs"
> > module, and therefore depends on python-eggs, which depends o
Quoting Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > Hmmm, but if only "python" can provide python-api-*, then any packages
> that
> > depend on python-api-X.Y will be broken when a new version of python
> > providing python-api-X.Z com
Quoting Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 29, 2001 at 11:17:19PM -0700, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> > > Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > > If you change the major or minor version of Python installed then
> > > packages
ersist untill someone
tells me to shut up (sorry :-)
> Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > From archive updating point of view, my scheme has a large
> > python-X.Y-foo added and a small python-foo updated when python
> > upgrades. Your scheme has a large python-foo updated and a lar
Quoting Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > Packages like extension modules _are_ tied to a particular version and
> hence
> > should be in a python-X.Y-foo package that installs into
> /usr/lib/pythonX.Y.
> > There would also be
Quoting Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Jim Penny wrote:
[...]
> The python is a small package to create a link from /usr/bin/python2.2
> to /usr/bin/python. python-eggs is a dummy package for dependencies
> (similar to what is done for GCC). When we upgrade Python to 2.2 we
> have:
>
>
G'day,
Hope you don't mind me Cc'ing to you guys. Let me know if you don't like it and
I'll stop.
Quoting Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[...]
> Open issue(s):
>
> - didn't handle the conversion/recompilation of /usr/local python
> packages.
Some other questions;
what happens with othe
Quoting Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > In my above diagrams the (>=2.1,<2.2) dependancy could be replaced
> with a
> > python-api-2.1 provided by python (as suggested by Neil), but I think
> this
> > actually introduces
Quoting Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Donovan Baarda writes:
> > Some other questions;
> >
> > what happens with other packages that might/might not have installed
> > stuff into /usr/lib/python1.5? Will they break?
>
> No. However the priority of
Quoting Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Jérôme Marant writes:
> > What about proposal and policy from Neil and his efforts?
>
> - the proposed packaging scheme doesn't allow smooth upgrades between
> one python version and a next version. compare python-1.5 to libc5
> and python-2.1 t
Quoting Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Donovan Baarda writes:
> > Quoting Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[...]
> > I don't see how this was such a showstopper. Getting the
> > dependancies right to ensure a clean transition would have been
>
Quoting Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
>
> On 16 Oct 2001, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> <...>
> > I installed both python1.5 and python2.1. And installing both on the
> same
> > system broke _all_ my python 1.5 packages: this is the alternative
> issue
> > Perl people have warned us about.
Quoting Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > ] python-2.1_2.1.1
> > ] python_2.1.1 (depends on python-2.1) (does "ln
> /usr/bin/python{2.1,}")
> > ] python-2.1-_ (depends on python-2.1)
> > ] python-_ (depends on python and
> python-2.1-)
> >
> > Hrm. That should be
Quoting Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> With the last python-1.5.2-18.2 NMU we have non-conflicting python1.5,
> 2.0 and 2.1 packages in unstable, not more not less.
>
> Here two proposals, how to go further on. The first proposal is a
> safer proposal (but needs more uploads and needs loon
On Sun, Oct 21, 2001 at 10:27:54AM +1300, Carey Evans wrote:
> Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> > exactly. But you see that these packages will break when you try to
> > upgrade. We can't make 2.1 the default right now, because we will
> > _silently_ break packages. Before
---
ABO: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more info, including pgp key
--
#! /bin/sh -e
#
# postinst script for the Debian python2.1-base package.
# Written 1998 by Gregor Hoffleit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
Quoting Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Jérôme Marant writes:
> > > I do propose that we install all architecture independant modules
> > > in /usr/share and all architecture dependent modules in /usr/lib
> > > as it has always been.
[..
Quoting Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Donovan Baarda writes:
> > Good point... I'd forgotten about that. This means we might as well go
> > strait to python2.1 as the default, but make sure that the
> python2.1-xxx
> > packages have versioned conflicts w
Quoting Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Carey Evans writes:
> > Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> Thanks. Updated in 0.3.2:
>
> http://ftp-master.debian.org/~doko/python/
Nice work updating Neil's policy. I'd be interested to hear Niels comments now
that he is back.
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 01:27:22PM +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
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 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 an
On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 01:38:05AM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> I've put a version 0.3.6 of the Python Policy Draft on
> http://people.debian.org/~flight/python/. The version is still a little
> bit rough and sometimes incomplete, but it already gives a good outline
> of the Python packaging sys
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 02:57:15PM +0100, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > 2.1.1 Support Only The Default Version
[...]
> > > + a new change to the major version of python, will make all
> > > packages depending on the default version being uninstalle
G'day,
Gregor's already answered most of these, but thought I'd throw in a comment
or two.
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 12:11:04AM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> On Oct 27, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> > I've put a version 0.3.6 of the Python Policy Draft on
> > http://people.debian.org/~flight/python/.
G'day,
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 10:34:05PM +0100, Joel Rosdahl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have now finished Debianizing eGenix mx BASE (based on patch done by
> Federico Di Gregorio, see bug#56):
>
> http://www.lemburg.com/files/python/eGenix-mx-Extensions.html
>
> The upstream maintainer of "th
Quoting Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Mikael Hedin writes:
> > Hi, I'm just finishing my new plucker package. And then I read the
> > policy again, and it said I should call my program python2.1-plucker,
> > as I use method 2 and the upstream name is plucker.
>
> Is plucker an applica
Quoting Anthony Towns :
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 11:38:57AM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > Note that additionaly all packages that depend on plucker _and_ python
> must
> > use "Depends: plucker, python2.1" and _not_ "Depends: plucker, python
> (>= 2
On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 05:23:30PM +0100, Joel Rosdahl wrote:
[...]
> But there is a problem: The current (from 1997) upstream version[1]
> doesn't work with Python >= 2.0. Now, Berthold Hoellmann, Oleg
> Broytmann and others have ported[2] kjbuckets to work with newer
> Pythons, but it's not as o
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 11:53:24AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 08:00:20PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > If I don't hear a serious reason to keep python1.5, I plan to file a
> > bug report for ftp.debian.org to remove the python1.5 package.
>
> Eh?
>
> python1.5's stil
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 02:52:51PM +, Ricardo Javier Cardenes wrote:
>
> I'm re-packaging 'sip' and 'python-pyqt' to make them comply the new
> Policy, but I've just found a problem. Let me explain it a bit:
>
> - sip is a tool that helps creating Python wrappers over C++ classes.
>It pa
Quoting Jim Penny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 11:44:27PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 07:22:36AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > > Anthony Towns writes:
[...]
> BTW: I have no feeling about dropping python-2.0; it appears that
> portation from 2.0
On Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 07:41:31PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> I have a suggestion, which may already have been thought of.
>
> Need: a python-module (pure Python) providing package should provide
> byte-compiled versions for all installed python versions (as long as
> there are no version depen
G'day,
just thought I'd have another look at the current policy and I couldn't find
it. Where is it again?
Can we get a link to it put on the Debian devel page?
http://www.debian.org/devel/
--
--
ABO: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 10:26:26AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Donovan Baarda writes:
> > G'day,
> >
> > just thought I'd have another look at the current policy and I couldn't find
> > it. Where is it again?
>
> /usr/share/doc/python, anybody a
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 11:28:50AM +0100, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 07:41:31PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > I have a suggestion, which may already have been thought of.
>
> For Python Policy 2.2.3, see
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2002/debian-python-200201/m
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 06:31:49PM -0500, Jim Penny wrote:
> OK, I am clearly not going to persuade you how wrong-headed ;-) you are,
> so proceed.
>
> Please use the debconf model. If there are enough clear benefits, both
> packagers and administrators will want to use your system.
[... snip
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 01:16:59AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 07:41:05PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > A program run by a user will never be able to write out the .py[co] files so
> > the files MUST be generated by the postinst which has root privs. Also we
> > c
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 10:16:09AM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> On 18/02/02, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 12:48:02PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
[...]
> > Look at http://people.debian.org/~calvin/python-central/
OK, I promised I would have a look are python-central and
On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 12:05:22AM +0100, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> Hello.
>
> The first version of the python-central package is online at
> http://people.debian.org/~calvin/python-central/
>
> It provides support for installing pure Python modules independent
> of the Python version (see Pyth
On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 10:06:06PM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> On 22/02/02, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > First, remember that this tool is explicity for the subset of packages
> > containing pure-python modules that work with multiple versions of Python.
>
> Well, but th
On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 10:17:16PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 10:19:56PM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > > > Why not take the emacsen-common method and code and use this for
> > > > python? It probably won't work for C-extension modules
On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 10:11:41PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 12:45:07PM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > > It may be that as python is simpler, we can simply have a script in a
> > > python-common package which does something like (pardon me if
On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 03:31:26PM -0500, Jim Penny wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 07:03:59PM -0500, Jim Penny wrote:
> > > On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 10:38:17AM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 12:05:22AM +0100, Bastian Kleineidam
On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 10:38:17AM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 12:05:22AM +0100, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> > The first version of the python-central package is online at
> > http://people.debian.org/~calvin/python-central/
&
On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 05:38:25PM +0100, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 03:34:46PM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> ...
> > OK, I got creative and figured out a way the python-central could work
> > without using an emac's style registry, instead just
On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 05:54:24PM -0500, Jim Penny wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 10:35:47AM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 03:31:26PM -0500, Jim Penny wrote:
[...]
> > The packages, provided they are built right, will be pretty self
> > explanitor
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 12:55:01PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 05:38:25PM +0100, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> > Are you sure all package names are sane? Or could some joker distribute a
> > (non official ofcourse) python package with a name just waiting to exploit
> > this un
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 09:07:53PM +0100, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> Hi Donovan,
>
> On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 10:38:17AM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > Did you see my analysis and modified "register-python-package" script? I
> > posted it under a misleading s
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 10:38:22AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> le mer 06-03-2002 ? 01:33, dman a ?crit :
>
> > | as I'm currently packaging solarwolf, I have a question about python
> > | bytecode. I have put the .py files used by the game in
> > | /usr/lib/games/solarwolf/ and I compile them
On Thu, Mar 07, 2002 at 02:19:25PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2002 at 10:49:48AM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 10:38:22AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Currently, you have the following options;
> > 3) Use "Depends:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 11:44:56AM +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I've had a small discussion with Julian Gilbey, packager of pktrace.
> Julian decided to make pktrace depend on python2.1, while pktrace does
> not depend on a specific python version per se.
>
> He asked me to take i
On Sun, May 19, 2002 at 10:57:43AM +0200, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> After a short mail exchange with Joey Hess, I decided not ot package
> zope-devhelper any more.
>
> Instead, we camed out with a better idea: implement a debhelper program that
> can install sheared debconf templates
On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 04:36:57PM +0200, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> Yeah,
>
> finally got around to update this package. Thanks to Donovan Baarda
> for his improvements!
> Please test this one if you want to build Python packages or modules.
>
> URL: http://people.debi
On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 04:50:02PM -, Moshe Zadka wrote:
> On Wed, 22 May 2002, Bastian Kleineidam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Ok, thats a problem. There is no way out for this; you'd have to
> > have two binaries.
>
> Yes, I know I'll have to have two binaries.
if I understand it, foo
On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 10:10:51AM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
[...]
> 1a) as 1), but also provide foo symlink for python (default).
>
> as 1), but also make foo (Depends: python (>=2.1), python (<<2.2),
> foo-python2.1) with symlink /usr/bin/foo to /usr/bin/foo-python2.2
A
On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 04:34:18AM -, Moshe Zadka wrote:
> On Thu, 23 May 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Baarda) wrote:
[...]
> > This situation is identical to the existing idle package. It's worth looking
> > at how it handles it.
>
> I'll take a look, than
On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 03:28:59PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> On Jul 25, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > My current plan is:
> >
> > - upload python2.3 packages soon (when 2.3alpha1 is released)
> >
> > - remove python1.5 from unstable
> >
> > - adopt python-central for 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3, hopefully
On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 08:40:02AM +0200, Martin Sj?gren wrote:
> fre 2002-07-26 klockan 03.31 skrev Donovan Baarda:
> > If people are using the "simple wrapper" approach to supporting the default
> > Python, then switching to 2.2 would just consist of releasing empty
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 09:22:51PM +0200, Florent Rougon wrote:
> Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Python 1.5.2 (#0, Jan 13 2002, 13:19:04) [GCC 2.95.4 20011223 (Debian
> > prerelease)] on linux2
> > Copyright 1991-1995 Stichting Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam
> > >>> ''.lower()
On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 11:29:12PM -0500, Graham Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 11:33:10PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > BTW, what is happening with python-central... is it becoming standard?
> > If so, the pythonX.X packages will need to use it.
>
> what i
On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 06:35:02PM +0200, Martin Sj?gren wrote:
> fre 2002-08-23 klockan 18.28 skrev Jim Penny:
> > What packages do you have in mind? Some of the c-extension maintainers,
> > myself included, have an informal policy of "support everything in the
> > distribution", but do not have
On Sat, Aug 24, 2002 at 07:48:31PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Some comments:
>
> - python-central should have a configuration option, how files are
> compiled. Most users don't need compilation with -O. Maybe
> a debconf option?
Hmm, could be done I guess, but this is already more than th
On Sun, Aug 25, 2002 at 09:14:58PM -0500, Graham Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 10:43:12AM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > In the end, I suspect it would be just as easy or easier to
> > re-structure mailman to put it's modules in
> > /usr/lib/python/site-
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 01:41:25PM +0200, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 11:29:12PM -0500, Graham Wilson wrote:
> > what is python-central?
> See http://people.debian.org/~calvin/python-central/
>
> doko wanted to include the script into the upcoming Python
> releases, which I
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 07:55:45AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Donovan Baarda writes:
> > On Sat, Aug 24, 2002 at 07:48:31PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > > Some comments:
> > >
> > > - python-central should have a configuration option, how files are
>
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 09:11:38PM +0200, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> hi,
>
> i just had a little email exchange with Christian Kurz about dput and i
> think the python policy need to be clarified. some background...
>
> last upload of python broke dput dependencies: they were
>
> python
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 07:48:38AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
>
> > You should depend on exactly the Python versions you support, not on
> > "python". For example
> > Depends: python1.5 | python2.1 | python2.2
>
> I see. But why not simply "Depends: python (>= 1.5)"
I think this is wro
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 08:49:21AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
>
> > On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 07:48:38AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
[...]
> > Remember, /usr/bin/python is a symlink installed by the "python" package,
> > and without a dependancy on this package there is no gaurentee that
On Sun, Sep 08, 2002 at 02:49:24PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * Graham Wilson
>
> | On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 09:08:36AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> | > Until dpkg supports triggers, I think what the emacsen does it the
> | > most sane -- I'd be really, really happy if python modules/apps
On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 04:57:51PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * (Donovan Baarda)
>
> | On Sun, Sep 08, 2002 at 02:49:24PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>
> | > Those scripts get a parameter saying which emacsen which is being
> | > installed, so they can decide whe
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 07:03:21PM +0200, Hugo van der Merwe wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 12:15:35PM +0200, Hugo van der Merwe wrote:
> > > I see python-numeric and python-numeric-ext have versioned dependencies
> > > on the python meta package. It doesn't look necessary to me, there are
> >
On Sun, Sep 29, 2002 at 12:26:30AM +0200, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> Hi,
>
> uploaded the new version 0.4 at
> http://people.debian.org/~calvin/python-central/
>
> python-central (0.4) unstable; urgency=low
>
> * renamed register-python-package to python-register, this way
> its prefixed
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 10:47:11PM +0200, Martin Sj?gren wrote:
> m??n 2002-09-23 klockan 22.34 skrev Graham Wilson:
[...]
> > > I can't think of a reason why you'd want the default package (as far
> > > as I can see they are useless, since you have to rebuild your
> > > packages every time a new
On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 08:13:23AM +1200, Carey Evans wrote:
> Donovan Baarda wrote:
>
> >finding all packages that depend on "python" is non-trivial using only
> >dpkg.
> >Something like dpkg-awk, grep-dctrl, or python-apt make it much easier, but
> &
On Sun, Sep 29, 2002 at 05:51:30PM +0200, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 29, 2002 at 11:29:02PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > I've just had a look at this and it looks good. It perfectly meets the
> > requirement of allowing pure python module packages to support mu
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 12:23:38AM +1200, Carey Evans wrote:
> Donovan Baarda wrote:
[...]
> It might also be nice to have separate files that list the directories
> or source files to compile for each package, and have python-central
> call compileall itself, but I guess this i
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 05:21:34PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Donovan Baarda writes:
> > > I wouldn't call moving some files the packaging hell, and I have yet to
> > > understand why /usr/lib/mailman is so much saner or better than
> > > /usr/lib/python/si
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 12:16:41PM -0600, Evan Simpson wrote:
> I'm running into dependency clashes while trying to install wxPython,
> and looking for help.
>
> Since I am a Zope developer, and different versions of Zope rely on
> different versions of Python, I need to have several versions of
On Fri, 2003-01-31 at 09:59, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeu 30/01/2003 à 22:42, Bernhard Kuemel a écrit :
[...]
> > ImportError: /usr/local/lib/python2.2/lib-dynload/math.so: undefined
>
> > symbol: PyFPE_jbuf
>
> The issue isn't in mailman. You have some
On Thu, 2003-02-06 at 06:55, Cédric Delfosse wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I think I am going to ITP boa-constructor (RFP at
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?archive=no&bug=101974 ).
> AFAIK nobody is working on it. Please confirm.
Way cool... boa-constructor is very nice.
I'm not sure what
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 01:11, Rasmus Toftdahl Olesen wrote:
> ons, 2003-03-26 kl. 04:04 skrev [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> [Snip]
> > checking for python... /usr/bin/python
> > checking python version... 2.2
> The configure script uses python2.2, while the woody python-gtk package
> is installed in python2.
with python 2.1)
3) it's not the convention... anywhere... even distutils generated rpm's
don't include the pyc files.
--
Donovan Baardahttp://minkirri.apana.org.au/~abo/
On Wed, 2003-04-02 at 13:46, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 23:20:22 +, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > 2) it ties you package to the particular version of python used to
> > generate the pyc files (ie, you had better have "Depends: python2.1" i
On Fri, 2003-04-18 at 19:54, Matthias Klose wrote:
[...]
> And/or take a look at dh_python, which does all this for "free"...
BTW, where can we find this? I'd like to take a look.
--
------------
Donovan Baarda
rute-forces everything without
taking into account the specifics of what the "python status" change is.
Perhaps a better way to do this is to instead just call the package
.postinst scripts, adding a few extra "context cue" parameters to tell
the package what has happened. For example call
"/var/lib/dpkg/info/python-foo.postinst configure pythonX.Y" when
pythonX.Y is installed and "/var/lib/dpkg/info/python-foo.prerm
pythonX.Y" when pythonX.Y is removed.
--
Donovan Baardahttp://minkirri.apana.org.au/~abo/
On Sat, 2003-04-19 at 15:29, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Donovan Baarda writes:
> > The things that need resolving, in no particular order;
> >
> > 1) moving /usr/lib/python* into /usr/share/python*. I consider this low
> > priority, but something that should be done
A brute force approach is to have the python packages post-inst run
"dpkg-reconfigure" over every package that depends on "python", and
require that packages recompile their pyc files on a "dpkg-reconfigure".
This has the advantage of "notifying" all these packages when the
default python has changed so they can do other stuff if they need to.
--
Donovan Baarda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 18:44, Alexandre Fayolle wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:58:25PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
[...]
> > Python applications using the default Python with their own modules not
> > in /usr/lib/site-python... not an issue?
Actually... I think I prefer /usr/
On Fri, 2003-08-08 at 14:44, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, Donovan Baarda wrote:
[...]
> > Try the following set of dependencies;
> >
> OK, for one, docutils isn't supported for python <2.2, so all those long
> lines get a bit shorter.
First I'd better qualify
On Fri, 2003-08-08 at 12:50, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 18:44, Alexandre Fayolle wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:58:25PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> [...]
> > > Python applications using the default Python with their own modules not
> > >
On Fri, 2003-08-08 at 22:31, Alexandre Fayolle wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 01:52:40PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > > It would be nice if you could specify dependencies as follows;
> > >
> > > Depends
do something about
it to re-compile them all.
Is there any magic planned :-)
Does anyone want me to contibute some code to try and do this? I think
the "python-central" stuff has most of the code to handle this, it just
needs a little bit of tweaking.
--
Donovan Baarda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ch dirctory in the PYTHONPATH
> from "python"s postinst?
Because there are some applications (ie mailman) that have their own
python modules that are not on the default python-path. These need to
be recompiled too.
--
---------
on python not very efficient.
--
--------
Donovan Baardahttp://minkirri.apana.org.au/~abo/
On Sun, Aug 10, 2003 at 02:58:21PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Donovan Baarda writes:
> > Does anyone want me to contibute some code to try and do this? I think
> > the "python-central" stuff has most of the code to handle this, it just
> > needs a little bit of
1 - 100 of 164 matches
Mail list logo
