Efraim Flashner <[email protected]> writes: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 06:23:07PM +0100, Danny Milosavljevic wrote: >> Hi Mathieu, >> >> On Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:52:41 +0100 >> Mathieu Lirzin <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > I think it would work better if when installing python@3, a ‘python’ >> > executable would be available in the PATH. Maybe there is a technical >> > reason for not doing so, but I find its absence rather confusing. >> >> For backward compatibility, the 'python' executable always has to be Python >> 2. >> >> A lot of old scripts specify just "/usr/bin/env python" in the shebang. >> >> On the other hand if your script supports Python 3 you know it. >> > > We do also have the 'python-wrapper' package which uses python3 as > python
Closing because it’s not a bug. -- Ricardo GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC https://elephly.net
