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
