Barry Warsaw wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Apr 12, 2008, at 6:50 PM, Gael Varoquaux wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 03:26:52PM -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
>>> Anyway, regardless of who's correct concerning this issue (we can
>>> agree
>>> to disagree), I'm canno
On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 19:54 -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> (That's also, by the way, why easy_install also always installs a
> versioned executable name for itself.)
So if setuptools can rely on this name, why doesn't it use it in the
shebang line?
Regards,
Cliff
_
John J Lee wrote:
> It allows you to think about "uninstallation" as "delete the app ==
> delete the file"
But 0install doesn't do that, as far as I can tell -- it
still keeps the data in some mysterious form and location
known only to itself, and requires you to use special tools
to install/rem
On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 19:54 -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> At 03:26 PM 4/12/2008 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 17:53 -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> > > At 12:30 PM 4/12/2008 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
> > > >PATH is *supposed* to affect applications.
> > >
> > > It affects w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Apr 12, 2008, at 6:50 PM, Gael Varoquaux wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 03:26:52PM -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
>> Anyway, regardless of who's correct concerning this issue (we can
>> agree
>> to disagree), I'm cannot understand why you'd want Pyth
At 03:26 PM 4/12/2008 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
>On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 17:53 -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> > At 12:30 PM 4/12/2008 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
> > >PATH is *supposed* to affect applications.
> >
> > It affects which application you should run, not which interpreter
> > you run the a
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 03:26:52PM -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
> Anyway, regardless of who's correct concerning this issue (we can agree
> to disagree), I'm cannot understand why you'd want Python to behave
> differently (from a deployment standpoint) than other languages.
Numbers ! Only numbers can
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Apr 12, 2008, at 6:26 PM, Cliff Wells wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 17:53 -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>> At 12:30 PM 4/12/2008 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
>>> PATH is *supposed* to affect applications.
>>
>> It affects which application you should
On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 17:53 -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> At 12:30 PM 4/12/2008 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
> >PATH is *supposed* to affect applications.
>
> It affects which application you should run, not which interpreter
> you run the application with.
I think that's splitting hairs and pret
At 12:30 PM 4/12/2008 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
>PATH is *supposed* to affect applications.
It affects which application you should run, not which interpreter
you run the application with.
___
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://
On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 13:49 -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> At 09:58 AM 4/12/2008 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
> >Unless I'm missing something, I can't see the advantage your way has
> >over the traditional way.
>
> Well for one, it isn't affected by changes in PATH.
I'd call this a distinct disadva
At 09:58 AM 4/12/2008 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
>Unless I'm missing something, I can't see the advantage your way has
>over the traditional way.
Well for one, it isn't affected by changes in PATH.
___
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 09:58:28AM -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 12:19 -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> > At 09:07 PM 4/11/2008 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
> > >It seems the correct solution to this is to use "#!/usr/bin/env
> > >python" (or rather, evaluate `which env` to account
On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 12:19 -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> At 09:07 PM 4/11/2008 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
> >It seems the correct solution to this is to use "#!/usr/bin/env
> >python" (or rather, evaluate `which env` to account for some systems
> >which have /bin/env rather that /usr/bin/env) wh
At 09:07 PM 4/11/2008 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
>Hi Phillip,
>
>I recently upgraded a hosting server from Python 2.4 to Python 2.5.
>Many of the sites on this server couldn't easily be upgraded to 2.5 (at
>least not in a timely fashion), so my interim solution was to simply
>symlink ~/bin/python ->
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008, Greg Ewing wrote:
> John J Lee wrote:
>>> I keep hoping that someday Linux will support something
>>> like MacOSX application bundles and frameworks,
>>
>> Not the same, but "something like":
>>
>> http://0install.net/
>
> That looks interesting, but I'm not sure I'd quite
> c
16 matches
Mail list logo
