Re: Installed wajig 0.2.11-1 (i386 source)

2002-01-12 Thread Malcolm Parsons
On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 01:32:06AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: > I don't care what FUD is, but apparently I still don't know the > answer to my initial question. > > How should python scripts be packaged ? Unless something else in the package is architecture dependent, the package should be Arch

Re: Installed wajig 0.2.11-1 (i386 source)

2002-01-11 Thread Junichi Uekawa
Steve Kowalik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit: > > That's a bug in python2.{1,2} then. What's the point of having a platform > > neutral 'compiled' version of a script if the format changes every time the > > wind changes direction? > FUD. Pure FUD. I don't care what FUD is, but appar

Re: Installed wajig 0.2.11-1 (i386 source)

2002-01-11 Thread Steve Kowalik
At 11:17 am, Friday, January 11 2002, Adam Heath mumbled: > That's a bug in python2.{1,2} then. What's the point of having a platform > neutral 'compiled' version of a script if the format changes every time the > wind changes direction? > FUD. Pure FUD. --

Re: Installed wajig 0.2.11-1 (i386 source)

2002-01-10 Thread Adam Heath
On Thu, 10 Jan 2002, Malcolm Parsons wrote: > There is no point byte compiling during package creation, as every time > the python2.{1,2} packages are upgraded, every .py file is byte > compiled again anyway: > > python2.2.postinst: > for i in $DIRLIST ; do > /usr/bin/python2.2

Re: Installed wajig 0.2.11-1 (i386 source)

2002-01-10 Thread Malcolm Parsons
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 09:07:06PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote: > On Wed, 9 Jan 2002, Malcolm Parsons wrote: > > > python modules should be supplied as source, and byte compiled in the > > postinst. > > No, they should be byte compiled during package creation. There is no point byte compiling during

Re: Installed wajig 0.2.11-1 (i386 source)

2002-01-09 Thread Adam Heath
On Wed, 9 Jan 2002, Malcolm Parsons wrote: > python modules should be supplied as source, and byte compiled in the > postinst. No, they should be byte compiled during package creation.

Re: Installed wajig 0.2.11-1 (i386 source)

2002-01-09 Thread Malcolm Parsons
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 07:01:15AM -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 03:06:52PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: > > Is byte-compiled python script platform-dependent? > > Is that not correct? Or does an i386 .pyc/.pyo work on other architectures? .pyc and .pyo files are comp

Re: Installed wajig 0.2.11-1 (i386 source)

2002-01-09 Thread Junichi Uekawa
Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit: > > Is byte-compiled python script platform-dependent? > > It is my (naive) understanding that it is not. > > Is that not correct? Or does an i386 .pyc/.pyo work on other architectures? I am not quite sure. I also wondered if it wa

Re: Installed wajig 0.2.11-1 (i386 source)

2002-01-09 Thread Dirk Eddelbuettel
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 03:06:52PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: > On Tue, 08 Jan 2002 15:13:08 -0500 > Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Description: > > wajig - Simplified Debian package management front end > > Changes: > > wajig (0.2.11-1) unstable; urgency=low > > .

Re: Installed wajig 0.2.11-1 (i386 source)

2002-01-09 Thread Junichi Uekawa
On Tue, 08 Jan 2002 15:13:08 -0500 Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Description: > wajig - Simplified Debian package management front end > Changes: > wajig (0.2.11-1) unstable; urgency=low > . >* Upgraded to new upstream release > Files: > e2a0aaa255f1fd9404ccc176c82