On 2013/01/09 01:27, frantisek holop wrote:
> hmm, on Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 09:09:44PM +0000, Stuart Henderson said that
> > > searching for it in e.g. devel/
> > > reveals only a handful of py-* that uses it.
> > > 
> > > the python documentation seems to imply that
> > > bytecode is arch independent..
> > 
> > I would generally avoid it for python things really, they are awkward
> > enough as it is without having to think about more things ;)
> 
> care to go into this a bit more? :]  what's awkward?

current peeves: the continual plist fiddling, and some things are
starting to show up with things like this in setup.py...

import distribute_setup
distribute_setup.use_setuptools()

...which doesn't work nicely with --single-version-externally-managed.
the reliance on timestamps for pyc files is a pain (though that's
hacked around in pkg_add tie_files now so it's just an inefficiency
rather than causing a visible problem any more). hmm what else..
oh yes, all the REVISION bumps when we switch version....

> i was thinking, if it was that useful, it would be
> already in pyhon.port.mk...

there are quite a few ports which have a mixture of python and other
things, I don't think there are really any good heuristics to avoid
using it incorrectly on these..

I'd rather get rid of PKG_ARCH=* completely (and I'm probably about
the only person who made serious use of this recently [to help with
arm package builds]) than have it used wrongly and produce broken
packages.

Reply via email to