On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 06:25:59AM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: > On 10/22/20 12:56 AM, DJ Lucas via blfs-dev wrote: > > On October 21, 2020 10:48:39 PM CDT, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev > > <blfs-dev@lists.linuxfromscratch.org> wrote: > > > On 10/21/20 10:06 PM, DJ Lucas via blfs-dev wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > In LFS, we can make the symlink to p3. For p2 in BLFS, we will use > > > 'make altinstall'. Everything else would be for non-python packages > > > that either use p2 or create a p2 module. > > > > > > > Ok, I'll go back and fix it that way locally then. I'm not too far. I have > > only like 8 packages that have py2 optional deps listed. > > > > So for BLFS, just do it and fix on the fly, or create a tracker bug and let > > the devs run through it a time or two? I don't think it's going to be all > > that big of a deal, but might be nice to avoid any interim breakage, do as > > one big commit or a small series of commits to make it easier on people who > > are upgrading. > > My thought is to fix it in LFS and python2 in BLFS and fix everything else > as the issues come up. It is a development release right now and we are > early in the cycle. > > -- Bruce >
I still think that creating a symlink for python in LFS is a bad idea (it will create unnecessary work). On my current build I removed /usr/bin/python and gimp found python2 without problems. Compare Arch where I think htey made the python3 -> python2 symlink years ago : they specify PYTHON=/usr/bin/python2 ./configure https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-packages/blob/packages/gimp/trunk/PKGBUILD Is there anything in the book which uses python3 and looks for python but does not look for python3 ? ĸen -- The people next door oppress me all night long. I tell them: I work all day, a man's got to have some time to learn to play the tuba. That's oppression, that is. [ Guards! Guards! ] -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
