> Am 23.03.2012 um 07:11 schrieb Ken Moffat: Hi Ken,
I'll be trying to comment (answer?) along the lines you took this thread to. > You have Python-2.6 and 2.7 ? 3.1.3 and 3.2.2 as well. > If so, perhaps you didn't reinstall *all* the packages > which create python modules ? I'm not aware of any missing stuff (Python modules, and the like), other problems, etc. Here, please bear with me with some gory details. 1. As I mentioned in my OP, Mesa flat-out missed those two files. AAMOF, before stumbling onto the more elegant PYTHONPATH solution, to have 'make' go my way, I used to cp -p /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/libxml2.py \ src/mesa/main/ cp -p /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/libxml2mod.so \ src/mesa/main/ (and two more in another subdirectory). So, according to my logic, even if say, on the installed 2.7 I messed up populating its 'site-packages' with the "proper" complement of files, these two files were still missing in the Mesa package no matter how you cut it. 2. Judging (or misjudging) by the lukewarm response to my OP, Python and its derivatives seem to be a bit of a black art to the other (B)LFS denizens too. I certainly have no intention of making a career out of it, despite its apparent popularity in certain circles (as we know, a lot of interesting packages depend on one Python version or another as well). And certainly I don't blame anybody less than enthusiastic about it. 3. _Not as a criticism_, but for _any other_ packages handled in the books, once you fully meet the "Requirements" and even add some of the "Optionals" into the mix, their build just "flows" naturally. BTW, that's obviously a testimony to the high quality of the instructions and the work that went into it. Thanks. I mentioned somewhere, I've been a fan of the "Chrome" browser, so every other week or so I update (~git) the sources, for the development advances at a furious pace and any Linux guy hates to fall behind. After the update proper, the procedure spends some more time with running a Python code of some sort at the end. Whether Python has a way of self-healing or the developers added a few PYTHONPATHs, HOMEs and/or played with 'sys.path', this end segment of the procedure would fail earlier (not the actual build, though) but not lately. Go figure. > I have to admit that upgrading Python2 on an existing system > is something I still don't understand how to do. > So far, I've taken the view that the risks, for me, of the > vulnerabilities outweigh the potential risks of trashing > everything in a botched upgrade ;) To minimize (or eliminate) the risks, I usually make a special system backup before an instinctively perceived tricky install like this Mesa, for example. Then I start groping around again until I hopefully guess right :) All I can say about my seven odd years of installing packages left and right following the excellent (B)LFS instructions is that as you can see, I've lived to e-mail about it. In the final analysis, Python may be like GTK+-2 and 3 just a matter of "well-tempered" pointers, I suppose :) Regards, -- Alex -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
