Le mercredi 18 janvier 2006 à 13:06 +0100, Matthias Klose a écrit : > the design decision of putting the binary-all python packages in a > separate directory into /var/lib/python2.x/site-packages has some > problems when supporting packages with extensions (a proposal beeing > made on #irc was to keep the extensions in the standard path). > > suppose you have the following scenario > > /usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/foo/ > __init__.py > fooext.so (doing a "import foomod") > foomod.py > > which is splitted into (by python-support) > > /usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/foo/ > __init__.py > fooext.so > > /var/lib/python2.3/site-packages/foo/ > __init__.py > foomod.py > > Having /var/lib/python2.3/site-packages appended to sys.path let's the > import of foomod fail (cannot be found). Using just one package > directory inside /usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages does avoid the > problem (the way the current python-central works).
As I already explained on IRC, dh_python will not hand .py files to python-support in architecture-dependent packages containing a .so module. This is unnecessary and would bring issues like this one. Regards, -- .''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\ : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom
