Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> writes: Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> writes:
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:35:43 am Ben Finney wrote: > > > On 23.03.2010 02:28, Ben Finney wrote: > > > > <URL:http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/fhs/fhs-2.3.html > > > >#VARCACHEAPPLICATIONCACHEDATA> > > > > > > > > This would suggest that Python could start using > > > > ‘/var/cache/python/’ for its cached bytecode tree on systems > > > > that implement the FHS. > > […] There's no implication that data-which-happens-to-be-code is > > unsuitable for storage in ‘/var/cache/foo/’. Easily-regenerated > > Python byte code for caching meets the description quite well, > > AFAICT. > > While I strongly approve of the concept of a central cache directory > for many things, I don't think that .pyc files fit the bill. > > Since there is no privileged python user that runs all Python code, > and since any unprivileged user needs to be able to write .pyc files, Hold up; my understanding is that, as Antoine Pitrou says: > The main point of the __pycache__ proposal is to solve the needs of > Ubuntu/Debian packagers. If you are developing (rather than deploying > or building packages), you shouldn't have these needs AFAICT. So, the packaging system will, by definition, have access to write to FHS directories and those directories don't need to be world-writable. -- \ “Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?” “I think so, | `\ Brain, but how will we get a pair of Abe Vigoda's pants?” | _o__) —_Pinky and The Brain_ | Ben Finney _______________________________________________ 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