Re: Fwd: python docs in contrib?
2007/12/17, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > Hi,
> > > I was surprised to find python2.{4,5}-doc in contrib and wondered why?
> > it needs latex2html to build.
> Are there any free near-equivalents?
There are, like hevea and tth, but as Python documentation says, "The
application of LaTeX2HTML to the Python documentation has been heavily
tailored".
I don't think anyone tried (or dared) to build Python documentation
with hevea or other replacements.
--
Seo Sanghyeon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Gaphor package depends on zope
2007/10/19, Cedric Delfosse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I have a new version of gaphor sitting in experimental, and I'd like to > push it into unstable. > > The problem is that this package depends on zope, because it needs > zope.component and zope.interface > > Gaphor is an UML drawing tool, so I don't think that installing the > complete zope server when installing gaphor is a fair idea for our > users. I think zope.interface is already available as a separate package, python-zopeinterface, which is self-contained. Perhaps similar thing can be done to zope.component? -- Seo Sanghyeon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: python-soappy, fpconst, and a new package.
I am one of SOAPpy upstream. Luke Yelavich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Hi all I am looking into packaging jack_mixer, requested by the upstream developer on IRC. One of its dependancies is the fpconst module. As it happens, fpconst can be found in the python-soappy package, which ahs nothing at all to do with jack_mixer, which is an audio application. I am wondering where we go from here. Do we separate out fpconst as a separate package, and have python-soappy depend on that, or should I place a copy of fpconst in with the new jack_mixer package? 2007/1/30, Reinhard Tartler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Looking at bugs like http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=379113, I'd say it makes much sense to have a separate python-fpconst package. I wonder if it makes sense to make the python-soappy package provide the extra binary package, or if it should go out of python-soappy and create a new source package. fpconst is maintained outside of SOAPpy, and is useful in itself. Therefore, fpconst should be its own source package as well as a separate binary package. Correct upstream URL for fpconst would be SourceForge's RSOAP project, as new release tarballs (well, they are far between) are posted to its download area. http://sourceforge.net/projects/rsoap -- Seo Sanghyeon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Outdated Python-related packages in Debian
My crystal ball, eh, my package tracker told me, that there are many outdated Python-related packages in Debian. I filtered false positives. (e.g. version parsing got it wrong, version packaged in Gentoo/FreeBSD is alpha/beta, etc.) http://sparcs.kaist.ac.kr/~tinuviel/package/list.cgi?name=python&version=1 aap, asciidoc, python-logilab-astng, python-beautifulsoup, bzr, python-cairo, cfv, zope-coreblog, zope-coreblog2, python-dnspython, python-forgethtml, python-formencode, python-gd, gnochm, python-irclib, python-japanese-codecs, python-kinterbasdb, lphoto, python-matplotlib, meld, python-moinmoin, python-omniorb, python-osd, python-paramiko, python-psyco, python-chm, pylint, python-pyparsing, python-pyvorbis, quodlibet, roundup, python-scgi, python-scientific, python-simplejson, python-soappy, spe, python-sqlrelay, tmda, viewcvs, python-visual, python-wxgtk2.6, python-xlib, zwiki. People on this list may want to get/help these packages updated. -- Seo Sanghyeon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: where is the Python tutorial?
2006/10/15, Florent Rougon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: python2.5-doc is in contrib, though (I don't know why). Because it requires non-free tools to build. Python used to ship these documentations in main without building, as upstream tarball includes documentations in compiled HTML format. -- Seo Sanghyeon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: status request?
From what I can tell, nothing have changed since this summary by Raphael Hertzog two weeks ago: http://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2006/05/msg00034.html "The only issue is Matthias Klose who absolutely wants to push big packaging changes at the same time whereas everybody else agree that we should take our time for those changes since we managed to live with the current python policy until now. I certainly hope we can discuss that IRL at Debconf. I would welcome a Python BoF." This is unfortunate, and I would be glad to hear about what was discussed at Debconf. Seo Sanghyeon
Re: how to make python package binNMU-safe [Bug#361940: python-mysqldb: can't be binNMUed due to arch: all -> arch: any dep]
Jonas Meurer wrote: > - drop pythonX.Y-mysqldb packages, provide one python-mysqldb package > for all python versions. i'm not sure whether this is possible at all. Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Not sure... and the python policy is kind of "not finished". But it seems > to make sense for me for some very small modules. > > http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/ch-module_packages.html#s-all_versions > > The policy says it's "not yet supported" and describes this the follwing > way: > > You have a version independent Python module. Create a single package > python-foo that has a dependency > > Depends: python > > It should install modules somewhere inside > /usr/lib/python/site-packages/ and use #!/usr/bin/python for > programs. The postinst script should create symlinks in all > /usr/lib/pythonX.Y/site-packages/ directories that point to its > /usr/lib/python/site-packages/ files and compile them. You can do this with python-support today. See python-cherrypy package for an example. Depends: python (>= 2.3), python (<< 2.5) Declare the minimum supported Python version. Package installs to /usr/share/python-support/$PACKAGENAME. postinst calls update-python-modules, which will bytecompile Python sources to /var/lib/python-support/$PYTHONVERSION for each Python versions installed. Instead of symlinking, python-support.pth, path configuration files are placed by python-support package, which extends Python's module search path. Path configuration file is documented here: http://docs.python.org/lib/module-site.html Seo Sanghyeon
Re: New python maintenance team
2006/4/6, Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Who would be interested to help ? I am very interested. (Alioth sanxiyn-guest) Seo Sanghyeon
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: Python packaging questions]
2006/2/4, Kai Hendry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I am new to python packaging and I'm a little concerned about this > 'setup.py'. > > It duplicates debian/control. So whilst maintaining one I have to worry > about keeping debian/control and that setup.py in sync. Argh! > > I'm not even sure *where* and *what* setup.py does with this values like > keywords, platforms and classifiers *on a Debian system*. I think they > aren't necessary, so can I do without it? Python package metadata are used for Python package index. It may be used for other tools too. Documents to read are: PEP 241: Metadata for Python Software Packages PEP 314: Metadata for Python Software Packages v1.1 PEP 345: Metadata for Python Software Packages 1.2 Reading the last one is enough if you aren't interested in history. http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0345.html Python package index (http://cheeseshop.python.org/pypi) web interface and commands are documented in this PEP: PEP 301: Package Index and Metadata for Distutils http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0301.html Now, to this specific question: You *do not* need to specify any metadata to use setup.py. Here's setup.py I wrote specifically for packaging SimpleParse in Debian: # Python distutils script for Debian package # Seo Sanghyeon from distutils.core import setup setup(packages=[ 'simpleparse', 'simpleparse.common', 'simpleparse.xml', ]) That's all. setup.py is a good idea in that it is the standard in Python community. It's widely understood and it works anywhere Python works. Most upstream uses it. But in case of feedparser and web.py, aren't they just a single file? I can't blame upstream for not interested in setup.py. I'm not sure what Joe Wreschnig means when he says it's "unmanagable". I think simple dh_install is fine for a single file package. Seo Sanghyeon
Re: some issues with the proposals for the python packaging infrastructure
On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 21:09 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > that is, packages with private modules but without extension modules
> > and no modules in /usr/lib/python2.x. how many packages are this?
2006/2/3, Joe Wreschnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Off the top of my head and in no particular order: pydance, solarwolf,
> pathological (this is standard practice in the Pygame community), uligo,
> linda, pychecker, amarok, reportbug, dput, python-gtk2-dev, straw,
> gdesklets-data, hal-device-manager.
drpython, luma, meld, nicotine, papercut, pype, pysol, rss2email, slune,
tmda...
While going through the list, I found some strange stuffs:
1. Why is luma Architecture: any? It's all Python.
2. python-tmda installs same files 3 times[!] to
/usr/lib/python2.{1,2,3}/site-packages
Seo Sanghyeon
Re: [Distutils] formencode as .egg in Debian ??
2005/11/28, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > (One of their other big complaints would be fixed by having Debian set > distutils.cfg such that the default install location for distutils stuff is > /usr/local/.../site-packages, rather than /usr. But I gather one such user > opened a bug for this issue separately, though.) http://bugs.debian.org/338572 I filed it. Seo Sanghyeon
Re: formencode as .egg in Debian ??
Martin wrote: > If there is no way to install the package directly into site-packages > using the provided setup.py, I think setup.py should be > modified/ignored. Bob wrote: > Won't this mean a total re-write of cdbs since it specifically looks for > setup.py? Matthias Klose wrote: > yes, if cdbs doesn't allow that. you don't have to use cdbs. it's not > a goal to adopt our packaging policies to the way cdbs _currently_ > works. No, not at all. DEB_PYTHON_SETUP_CMD := debian/setup.py Write your own setup.py under debian/. Done. Seo Sanghyeon
Re: Missing setup of /usr/local/lib/python2.4/site-packages
2005/11/11, Martin Skøtt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I'm posting here instead of to the BTS since this problem affects > at least python2.3 and python2.4. (snip) Bug filed as #338572. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=338572 Seo Sanghyeon
Re: Missing setup of /usr/local/lib/python2.4/site-packages
2005/11/11, Martin Skøtt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > The root of the problem was that distutils, as installed by python2.4, > wasn't configured to know of /usr/local/lib/python2.4/site-packages. > > Would it be possible for the python2.X packages to include the > necessary /usr/lib/python2.4/distutils/distutils.cfg file to avoid > others having the same problem? This is a very good idea. We don't want site-local installation to be installed under /usr, do we? But that's what the current default is. So in my opinion, there should be: $ cat /usr/lib/python2.3/distutils/distutils.cfg [install] prefix = /usr/local (Please use prefix, not install_lib as OP suggested. This should handle install_scripts, install_man and all other distutils options.) shipped by Debian Python packages. This should solve all easy_install related problems, as well as python setup.py install problems, provided the user in question has write access to /usr/local (by being a member of staff group, for example). Seo Sanghyeon
Re: python "rpm" module package
On 10/20/05, Rakotomandimby Mihamina wrote: > I looked at the packages.debian.org website and thought > "python2.x-rpm" would be my solution but after install: > > root-debian# updatedb; locate rpm.py > (snip) > > So that I see rpm.py does not exist. > Would you know where and how could I install this one? I guess you are not very experienced with Python? "import rpm" doesn't necessarily load rpm.py. Behold: $ python Python 2.3.5 (#2, Aug 30 2005, 15:50:26) [GCC 4.0.2 20050821 (prerelease) (Debian 4.0.1-6)] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> import rpm >>> rpm.__file__ '/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rpm/__init__.pyc' >>> rpm is a Python package, not a Python module. "import rpm" loads rpm/__init__.py. Seo Sanghyeon
