Hi, On 6/21/07, Johannes Sasongko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi, Samuli Suominen wrote, On 21/06/2007 2:01 PM: > Another thing I've been worrying about is location of .py files, soon > to be also .pyc and .pyo since /usr/share is reserved for just that, > sharing among other systems which may not be even same architehture, > operating system, python version, .. you name it. Maybe something like > this could be used to determine site-packages location.. pyc/pyo files are arch-independent. I have no idea whether these bytecode files are backwards- and forwards-compatible, but even if they're not, Python falls back to the py files anyway. The only advantage of using site-packages is that for each python version you have there can be a compiled version of the modules.
They're not backwards-compatible, which is part of why we have separate dirs for 2.5 and 2.4 source files. However, it really shouldn't matter as it will end up compiled against the version of python on the system at install anyway. If we really wanted to put the py and pyc files into site-packages, perhaps moving to python's distutils would be the best way. Aren -- "Whoever said sunshine brings happiness has never danced in the rain." - K. Jackson Ubuntu Linux - www.ubuntu.com
_______________________________________________ Exaile-devel mailing list [email protected] http://exaile.org/mailman/listinfo/exaile-devel
