On 9/21/19 9:37 AM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote:
On 9/21/19 7:46 AM, rhubarbpieguy--- via blfs-support wrote:
Although Python 3 is now installed in LFS, it appears necessary to
reinstall Python 3 in BLFS to install Python modules. From the
Python 3 documentation:
"Python 3 was installed in LFS. The only reason to install it
here is if optional modules are needed."
I understand the note, but a user following dependency links doesn't
see it. For instance, Mako is required for Mesa, but the Mako link
references the Mako page, which makes no mention of reinstalling
Python 3. As Python 3 was installed in LFS, a user would have no
reason to suspect Python 3 must be reinstalled.
Would it make sense to add a note to Python modules using python3
indicating Python 3 must be reinstalled?
Is it practical to amend the Python 3 LFS procedures to eliminate
reinstalling Python 3 in BLFS? That would eliminate the need for
notes in BLFS and the Python 3 documentation.
I'm pretty sure the additional modules that section refers to are for
berkeleydb, sqlite, and tk. It is not needed for any of the modules
in the blfs python modules section.
-- Bruce
Thank you for the clarification. But I've apparently done something
wrong, as when installing MarkupSafe I receive:
ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'html'
The entire message complains about setuptools and if I then compile
Python 3, MarkupSafe compiles without error.
I first installed X and assumed the problem was related to the note in
the Python 3 documentation as reinstalling Python 3 fixes the problem.
Everything else installed flawlessly and I've run BLFS 9.0 since the day
of release. So this is not a problem, but I would be interested in
knowing what I've done wrong to receive the error.
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
