On 23 Jul, 2010, at 11:54, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Jul 23, 2010, at 11:48 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote: > >>> I'd be open to adding the >>> platform name to the tag, but I'd probably define it as part of the >>> implementation field, e.g. foo.cpython-linux2-32m.so. Or maybe >>> start with the platform name, e.g. foo.linux2-cpython-32m. This >>> isn't a strong preference though. >> >> I don't have a strong opionion, but placing the platform name at the >> start is probably better to be consistent with >> sysconfig.get_platform(). > > What about the architecture (i386, amd64)? With every increase in length I > start to get more concerned. We could encode the platform and architecture, > but that gets into cryptic territory. OTOH, would you really co-install i386 > and amd64 shared libraries on the same machine? (hello NFS ;).
I don't need this, but then again I primarily use a platform where the vendor has a proper solution for having binaries for multiple architectures ;-) Ronald
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ 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
