`.py` suffixes removed.
I don't think there's anything fragile about this particular use of `print`,
nor does it require the `print_function` import. It is also nothing new, the
previous `%python_sitelib` and `%python_sitearch` definitions used it too.
--
You are receiving this because you
Oh well, anyway, since it was not my purpose to actually make the sys.stdout ->
print changes, they're back to sys.stdout.write in this latest revision.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Oops, the print stuff is like I said in the macros shipped by Fedora's
python-rpm-macros, not here (here they were using sys.stdout.write). But the
rest of what I said still stands.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/221
-- Commit Summary --
* Use scripts instead of python -c to retrieve %python_* values
* Get %python_version from platform.python_version_tuple
-- File Changes --
M
Conan-Kudo requested changes on this pull request.
I would suggest renaming the files so that they don't end in `.py`. That way,
they won't be byte compiled by either the interpreter or by rpm during the
package build process.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this
It's missing the `from __future__ import print_function`.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Using print() looks fragile from a Python 2 vs Python 3 POV.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
