Le mardi 12 septembre 2006 à 10:16 +0200, Loïc Minier a écrit : > That's the bulk of the problem; Josselin: I think the alternatives > system doesn't offer any guarantee that any link will be touched, the > symlink might not even exist. Do you think we should consider > upgrading existing installs with a diversion based system instead of > the alternatives? Or perhaps drop support for gtk1.2 via alternatives?
I think we should entirely drop the alternatives, yes. How about the
following plan?
* Remove the alternative in pygtk in favor of shipping pygtk
in /usr/lib/python2.4, just like the rest of the package which
isn't python-{support,central}ized.
* Just ship pygtk.py with the other files in python-gtk2, provided
by python-support; introduce a conflict with the previous
python-gtk-1.2 package to avoid upgrade issues.
Because of the way sys.path works with .pth files, pygtk will always be
imported from python-gtk2 first, if both packages are installed. This is
a bit hackish, but it is only a temporary measure until we can remove
python-gtk-1.2.
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\
: :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
