On 18.2.2007, at 19.39, Markus Weissmann wrote:
On 18.02.2007, at 17:47, Yves de Champlain wrote:
Le 07-02-17 à 14:15, Blair Zajac a écrit :
Yves de Champlain wrote:
Le 07-02-17 à 11:32, Yves de Champlain a écrit :
Le 07-02-17 à 11:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
Revision
22092 <http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/
changeset/22092>
Author
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date
2007-02-17 08:18:26 -0800 (Sat, 17 Feb 2007)
Log Message
new port py25-bz2 - python 2.5 bindings to bzip2
I am a bit confused. Python 2.5 is presented as current
production version on python.org, but these commits make it
look like a special case. Is there some sort of problem with
python 2.5 on Mac ? Or is this a problem with how python is
managed in MacPorts ?
Just let me be a little more precise : could there be py24-* and
py25-* ports for python ports that use a specific PortGroup and
py-* ports for python packages that don't use a PortGroup ?
But wouldn't that require the Python builds to have a common
shared place to look for non-binary modules, so we only have to
depend upon one port. Also, non-binary modules that depends upon
binary modules would still need to be versioned for each version
of Python, I think :)
Yes, that is part of the question.
I maintain a few python ports (gtk2, gobject and cairo) while not
being really proficient with python setup and configuration.
But these ports don't belong to a portgroup but rather look for
python through a configure script and will accept both 2.4 and
2.5, so should I still make py25 versions of them ?
Depends: If the port just needs "some" python interpreter at run
time, you don't need a py- named port at all, so are just for
python modules.
For python modules the problem is, that they install themselves in
$prefix/lib/python2.4/ (or 2.5); we can't unify those two (or taken
2.3 into account: three) directories, or at least I wouldn't try to
- there is code that works with 2.4 but not 2.5 and vice versa, so
we'll run into problems here, sooner or later.
Currently our "main" python is v2.4 and I'd say we'd stay with that
at least until 2.5.1 is out. But even then there is software that
only will work with 2.4, so please don't move py- (2.4) ports to
py25- (2.5) ones. If you need a python 2.5 version of that module,
duplicate the port. Duplicates are fine here, as I'd expect that
some modules will switch to 2.5 compatible code so we will probably
have something like this in the future:
py-module, version 1.8
py25-module, version 2.2
So we should approach this "switch" slowly, duplicating all the
modules we need for 2.5 - if they work. In some years we probably
can then nuke the py- (2.4) modules when the py41 ports take
over... ;)
cheers,
-Markus
--
Markus W. Weissmann
http://www.mweissmann.de/
Well,
I beg to differ once again (though I am not sure it makes any
difference). The ports with no version number should always be for
the latest versions. If ports are duplicated or version-dependent
ports are written, they should always be for previous versions that
for one reason or other are incompatible. The structure should be
simple and consistent (e.g. like in the system frameworks), that
benefits us all. But again, I do not make the decisions here (though
if all ports are handled like this, what is the result).
!
! Jyrki Wahlstedt
! skype:jyrkiwahlstedt
! http://www.wahlstedt.fi/jyrki/
!
! Our life is no dream; but it ought to become one and perhaps will.
! PGP key ID: 0x139CC386 fingerprint: F355 B46F 026C B8C1 89C0 A780
6366 EFD9 139C C386
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
