On 16/04/2019 04:18, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 4/15/19 9:03 PM, Douglas R. Reno via lfs-dev wrote: >> >> On 4/15/19 8:57 PM, Kevin Buckley via lfs-dev wrote: >>> I am sure that there are reasons for not doing this but I've noticed, >>> as a result of Xen no longer needing Python 2, that there isn't a >>> bare `python` installed within LFS. >>> >>> Start of the xen-devel thread detailing this is here: >>> >>> https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2019-04/msg00996.html >>> >>> >>> Should there be a note about how to create one, including a note >>> about Pythons 2 and 3 in the LFS Book, now that we have have >>> to have Python3 just to compile Glibc. >> >> I believe that we did this because most applications still call >> /usr/bin/python and expect it to be python2. You could do a symlink to >> python3 as /usr/bin/python as a temporary solution (I have to use that for >> 'htop', which I build at the end of LFS, and then I remove the symlink to >> prevent issues with Python2's installation). >> >> Generally, we also look towards Arch as a reference. Arch still has a >> 'python' equaling 'python2', at least the last time I checked, but it's >> possible that it's changed since then. > > Actually Arch's instance of python is p3. They have to jump through a few > hoops when p2 is required to build a package. >
I think linking python->python3 is a bit premature. We should do that when upstream python does, or most packages expect it, but not only one. ATM, a lot of packages, which can accept P3, can still accept python2.7, and expect python to point to python2.7. And packages bound to P2 expect usually python to point to python2.x. That may change within a year or so (when P2 is not maintained anymore). Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
