On 25/11/2018 23:14, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: >> On 2018-11-24 15:49:25 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >>> There's been some preliminary discussion about starting to default to >>> python3, but given this project's inherent conservatism, I don't expect >>> that to happen for some years yet. In any case, whenever we do pull >>> that trigger we'd surely do so only in HEAD not released branches, so >>> buildfarm owners will need to deal with the case for years more. > >> Why don't we probe for python2 in addition to python by default? That >> ought to make RHEL 8 work, without making the switch just yet. > > I'm unexcited about that because that *would* be expressing a version > preference --- and one that's on the wrong side of history.
I think it would be appropriate to probe in the order python python3 python2 This would satisfy most scenarios that are valid under PEP 394. > Also, I noticed on a fresh FreeBSD 12.0 installation that what > I've got is > > $ ls /usr/bin/pyth* > ls: /usr/bin/pyth*: No such file or directory > $ ls /usr/local/bin/pyth* > /usr/local/bin/python2.7 > /usr/local/bin/python2.7-config > /usr/local/bin/python3.6 > /usr/local/bin/python3.6-config > /usr/local/bin/python3.6m > /usr/local/bin/python3.6m-config > > So there are modern platforms on which "python2" isn't going to make > it work automatically either. I don't think this is a setup we need to support. You are probably suppose to install a meta package that will provide a "python" or "python3" binary. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services