The issue I had raised was attention to the needs of Linux packaging and the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard, and apparently that is under consideration.
The response I received (from "Daniel Holth" <[email protected]>) said in part "The FHS issues are on the list, which is why there are "resource categories" that can be installed wherever in new-packaging land." I assume that by an "installer" you mean the combination of package building (done by e.g., rpmbuild) and installation (done by e.g., rpm or yum). The mapping of files from the Pypi structure to the target directories is done at package-build time and not usually at install-time. What a function like bdist_rpm does is to create an rpm spec and turn the package building function over to rpmbuild. The file mapping is defined in the rpm spec and takes place during the rpmbuild processing. What I didn't notice in the distlib documentation were low level functions that would facilitate the allocation of Pypi files/directories to target files/directories to help in preparation of the rpm spec. Stan Klein On Fri, October 5, 2012 1:24 pm, Vinay Sajip <[email protected]> wrote: > Message: 3 > Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 15:49:04 +0000 (UTC) > From: Vinay Sajip <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Distutils] distlib updated - comments sought > > Stanley A. Klein <sklein <at> cpcug.org> writes: > >> I looked at the documentation and can't completely follow what you are >> doing, although I was told in another email that the issue I raised was >> being addressed in pkg_resources. > > The goal of distlib is to provide a library of low-level functions > relating > to packaging and distribution of Python software, and it does not contain > any > installers (though it will contain low-level code which could be used by > an > installer). The distlib code aims to serve as an implementation of the > various > packaging PEPs, such that if higher level tools use distlib, they should > be > able to both save writing code (and thereby gain time) as well as achieve > better interoperability with other packaging tools. > > The goal of distlib is not to be a complete packaging solution (which > packaging > tried to be for Python 3.3, but it proved to be too ambitious a goal). > > Which issue are you referring to, which you were told was addressed by > pkg_resources? From the section starting "Here is what I need", I couldn't > see how pkg_resources could fulfil those needs by itself. > > >> Here is what I need: > [snip] >> I can't completely see how I would do this using what is described in >> the >> distlib documentation. > > What you need is an installer, and distlib doesn't contain functionality > to do > installation. I won't rehash the various discussions around the needs of > Linux > distro packagers, except to say that the PEPs have taken into account the > needs > of distro packagers and the ability to map various parts of a distribution > to > various target directories in a distro-specific manner. > > Regards, > > Vinay Sajip > _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
