On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 12:33:49PM +0100, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > > The data isn't for them to use to meet their use cases, it's for them to > > *provide* so that Python tools don't stomp on, uninstall, or otherwise > > interfere with files installed by the system. In other words, for > > system packagers, it's a communication from the system to Python, rather > > than the other way around. Even though the distutils will build the > > file in the bdist, the system packaging tools would be free to generate > > their own file listing and signatures and such. > > Ok, that's a reasonable requirement. It will be difficult to implement, > though, as it will require Linux distributors (in particular) to include > the database snippets in their packages. > > Essentially, one would have to contribute patches to all the > distributions (we care about, at least), and then nag the respective > maintainers to include these patches.
Not true. You just need to make sure that "setup.py install" creates that database. With the proposed format of the database this is just a file in the correct location - exactly for this reason. Next time the distribution will build the package that database file will be in place. I still maintain that an installdb for the system packages doesn't bring anything to the party as it would be in a system-only directory. But I've argued that in my other emails... Regards Floris -- Debian GNU/Linux -- The Power of Freedom www.debian.org | www.gnu.org | www.kernel.org _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
