2009/4/18 Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com>: > Benjamin Peterson wrote: >> 2009/4/18 Mitchell L Model <mlmli...@comcast.net>: >>> Some library files, such as pdb.py, begin with >>> #!/usr/bin/env python >>> In various discussions regarding some issues I submitted I was told that the >>> decision had been made to call Python 3.x release executables python3. (One >>> of the conflicts I ran into when I made 'python' a link to python3.1 was >>> that some tools used in making the HTML documentation haven't been upgraded >>> to run with 3.) >>> >>> Shouldn't all library files that begin with the above line be changed so >>> that they read 'python3' instead of python? Perhaps I should have just filed >>> this as an issue, but I'm not confident of the state of the plan to move to >>> python3 as the official executable name. >> >> That sounds correct. Please file a bug report. > > As Kevin pointed out, while this is a problem, changing the affected > scripts to say "python3" instead isn't the right answer. > > All that happened with the Python 3 installers is that they do > 'altinstall' rather than 'fullinstall' by default, thus leaving the > 'python' alias alone. There is no "python3" alias unless a user creates > it for themselves (or a distro packager does it for them).
I've actually implemented a python3 alias for 3.1. > > I see a few options: > 1. Abandon the "python" name for the 3.x series and commit to calling it > "python3" now and forever (i.e. actually make the decision that Mitchell > refers to). I believe this was decided on sometime (the sprints?). -- Regards, Benjamin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
