Anthony Towns wrote: > On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 08:32:33AM -0700, Neil Schemenauer wrote: > > Anthony Towns wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 10:13:17AM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote: > > > > Say, you would install 2.1.2 in /usr/local. > > > How about we just say "Don't install other versions of python in > > > /usr/local" ? > > Please no. Making this work properly is not hard. > > Again, _why_ does this matter? Who does this? Is it even remotely common?
Every Python developer I know does it. > That people would even consider installing another version of python in > /usr/local surely just points to a problem with the Debian packaging, no? The python in my path is on an NFS server. It includes many extensions that are not packaged by Debian. When we upgrade we don't want to upgrade each box individually. Also, since we are using version 2.1.1, yes, it's also a problem with Debian packaging. The Debian release cycle is too long to track stable Python releases. > The problems with using "#!/usr/bin/python1.5" is threefold: first, it > makes dependencies that much more complicated: *all* python scripts have > to depend on versioned modules in every way This has nothing to do with using "/usr/bin/python(X.Y)?" vs. "/usr/bin/env python(X.Y)?". If you want to use the latest packaged version of Python you should use "/usr/bin/python" > If you install new versions of standard tools in /usr/local you have > to be careful. This applies to a hypothetical /usr/local/bin/dpkg, or > a /usr/local/bin/sed, or whatever. Going out of your way to make sure > it doesn't apply to a /usr/local/bin/python seems to this observer a > complete waste of time. The effort involved is small. Use "/usr/bin/python" instead of "/usr/bin/env python". Use "/usr/bin/pythonX.Y" instead of "/usr/bin/env pythonX.Y". Neil
