On 04/07/2014 03:39 PM, picca wrote: >> As for http_proxy='localhost', it's much better to write >> http_proxy='127.0.0.1:9', as there really could be a web proxy running >> on localhost, and you don't really want to use it, do you? > > I just used the snipset of the wiki page explaining the library > packaging. Maybe the wiki should be changed.
Yes. Which wiki page? URL? >> Also, are you >> doing like this to avoid intersphinx? In this case, why don't you just >> remove the intersphinx extension from conf.py? That's IMO much cleaner >> than just blocking the connection. > > It is easier for me to deal with this from the debian/rules files instead of > maintaining a patch. Ahum... "maintaining a patch" is probably an overstatement here. Here's an example "diff" (not a valid diff for computers, but enough for understanding by humans): extensions = ['sphinx.ext.autodoc', 'sphinx.ext.todo', 'sphinx.ext.coverage', - 'sphinx.ext.intersphinx', So, you'd be just removing 'sphinx.ext.intersphinx' from the extensions list, that's a really minimalistic one liner patch. And that's much much much cleaner than forcing sphinx to fail accessing the network. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53457de4.1000...@debian.org