On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Jacek Konieczny <jaj...@jajcus.net> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 02:38:49PM +0200, Patryk Zawadzki wrote: >> Except in Python you can execute/import .py files just fine. If the >> program is not closed source, .pyc/.pyo/__pycache__ are just an >> optimization detail. We could very well create them in %post. > That is a very bad idea. Bad things will happen if the package is > removed and *.py[o] stays (the module will still be visible to Python). > Best way to make sure 'compiled' files are gone when the package is gone > is to include them in the package.
We have %ghost and we can remove such files on uninstallation. My point is that .py[co] is how even more of an optimization detail than it was before. Can any other implementation of python handle __pycache__? What if two packages install a file to somedir/? Which gets to own __pycache__? Can python itself remove obsolete caches when politely asked? Can it keep the __pycache__ tree in a separate prefix instead of along the files? -- Patryk Zawadzki I solve problems. _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en