Re: version independent pythin packages: ?

2003-08-07 Thread Alexandre Fayolle
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:58:25PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote: > The only problem is when someone with write access to > /usr/lib/site-python uses a non-default python... the pyc's will be > "updated" for the non-default python. > > After testing, it seems that there is no way to prevent root f

Re: version independent pythin packages: ?

2003-08-07 Thread Ricardo Javier Cardenes Medina
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:58:25PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote: > Anyone else agree? I see no problem, aside from performance for those users not using the default version, but since this is only a "load time" problem, it shouldn't be more than a little annoyance. I suppose that really picky users

Re: version independent pythin packages: ?

2003-08-07 Thread Matthias Urlichs
Hi, Alexandre Fayolle wrote: > The last point is how to write dependencies on packages which are ot > available on all python versions. For instance python-docutils needs > python-xmlbase and python-difflib. python-xmlbase exists for python2.1 > and 2.2 but not 2.3, and difflib exists for 2.1, but

/usr/include/python

2003-08-07 Thread Roland Stigge
Hi, why isn't there a default /usr/include/python (possibly accomplished as a symlink in the package python-dev, like /usr/bin/python in the package python)? (I'm sure there is a reason for that, I just didn't find it documented somewhere.) Thanks! bye, Roland signature.asc Description: This

Re: /usr/include/python

2003-08-07 Thread Matthias Klose
Roland Stigge writes: > Hi, > > why isn't there a default /usr/include/python (possibly accomplished as > a symlink in the package python-dev, like /usr/bin/python in the package > python)? (I'm sure there is a reason for that, I just didn't find it > documented somewhere.) it's not needed. distu

Re: version independent pythin packages: ?

2003-08-07 Thread Donovan Baarda
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 18:44, Alexandre Fayolle wrote: > On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:58:25PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote: [...] > > Python applications using the default Python with their own modules not > > in /usr/lib/site-python... not an issue? Actually... I think I prefer /usr/lib/python/site-p

Re: python 2.2 -> python 2.3 transition

2003-08-07 Thread Domenico Andreoli
i agree, we have a great support for Python. thanks to those who make it possible. cavok On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:47:48AM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote: ... > > Personally I was going to post "nice job everyone... the Python Policy > looks like it is working". There are still a few niggly thing