I wasn't able to find much recent discussion on this, but I'm a bit
frustrated that there is so much manual work being done creating symlinks
when a system already exists for that.
It seem many projects which support both python2 and python3 are depending
on a hardcoded shebang, install order, or
Hi!
On 05/27/2016 07:44 PM, John Dennis wrote:
On 05/27/2016 10:10 AM, Tomas Orsava wrote:
I think the python2-XXX package in the examples is missing something
like this:
Requires: %{_bindir}/sample-exec
Make sense?
I believe there is a misunderstanding. In your first message you said
"But
Hi Rajesh!
the `binclock` project is a bit problematic. As you can see in the note
on the left side on the PortingDB, the upstream for this project is
abandoned, emails bounce. If you go look into the Bugzilla link on the
same page, you'll also find that someone has made a Python 3 patch, but
Hello,
As it seems there is already an open bug regarding this package [0]
The patch that is posted there ports binclock to python 3 however the
maintainer hasn't responded as of yet. So the porting work has already been
done basically, as a downstream patch at least, only the changes need to b
