Re: Correct location of .py and .pyc files

2003-11-17 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le dim 16/11/2003 à 11:34, Matthias Klose a écrit : > There is no reason why /usr/share/ should be disallowed. That depends on whether .pyo files really are architecture-independent. At least the generated files are different on different architectures. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette

Re: Correct location of .py and .pyc files

2003-11-17 Thread Florent Rougon
Hi, Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Le dim 16/11/2003 à 11:34, Matthias Klose a écrit : >> There is no reason why /usr/share/ should be disallowed. > > That depends on whether .pyo files really are architecture-independent. > At least the generated files are different on different a

Re: Correct location of .py and .pyc files

2003-11-17 Thread Terry Hancock
On Monday 17 November 2003 09:22 am, Florent Rougon wrote: > Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Le dim 16/11/2003 à 11:34, Matthias Klose a écrit : > >> There is no reason why /usr/share/ should be disallowed. > > > > That depends on whether .pyo files really are architecture-independe

Re: Correct location of .py and .pyc files

2003-11-17 Thread Matthias Klose
Terry Hancock writes: > On Monday 17 November 2003 09:22 am, Florent Rougon wrote: > > Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Le dim 16/11/2003 à 11:34, Matthias Klose a écrit : > > >> There is no reason why /usr/share/ should be disallowed. > > > > > > That depends on whether .pyo files

Re: Correct location of .py and .pyc files

2003-11-17 Thread Florent Rougon
Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There was some discussion on comp.lang.python about > standardizing the bytecode awhile back, but the consensus > was that the standardized part of Python is *the source code*. > IMHO, they (/we) don't want to encourage obfuscated > distributions of Pyth