On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 10:46:33PM +, Ben Finney wrote:
Pierre Habouzit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 10:59:05AM +, Ben Finney wrote:
What makes you think 'foo.pyc' is /var material?
Oh yes that seems obvious to me. In fact, I'd say it should be
/var
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 07:55:44AM +, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
Pierre Habouzit wrote:
This is _wrong_ to put XB-PV: 2.4, 2.5 for an arch:all package, this
should be XB-PV: all or something similar.
Even if you package doesn't work with some supported Python versions? (e.g
symlink farm and keep byte compiled stuff in /var/lib like it does right
now.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgpl8FyV9yXUK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 10:59:05AM +, Ben Finney wrote:
Pierre Habouzit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 11:20:10PM +, Ben Finney wrote:
Floris Bruynooghe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
/var/lib : Variable state information [...] State information
is data
, which is way
more robust, because information exists in a single place.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgp8DDvws3aFF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 05:52:52PM +, Vincent Bernat wrote:
OoO Pendant le temps de midi du lundi 07 janvier 2008, vers 12:50,
Pierre Habouzit [EMAIL PROTECTED] disait:
Le lundi 07 janvier 2008 à 07:56 +0100, Vincent Bernat a écrit :
Well, if you can change the order
· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgpH9Vodhz2uc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
rather see a mass bug filling on those
packages, and see the maintainers that feel their package should be
built for one version only say it loud first.
Then maybe we will consider making it RC.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOO
anyone already looked into trac plugins? what is the best way to
handle these?
IMHO you should rather contact the trac maintainer on this issue, as
he should be the one having the more clues and good advices here IMHO.
Cheers,
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 12:17:33AM +0100, Floris Bruynooghe wrote:
Hi
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 08:39:42PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
wrt the current thingie, I may have a proposal ready soon, I just
need to polish the details, and look how hard it would be to upgrade
the dh_py* tools
the package
FTBFS.
Obviously, the problem is harder when only one python version is
supported at the time, as you cannot made the difference between the
two.
That's why I've not done any proposal yet, because the problem does
not look obvious in the first glance.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O
On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 06:47:03PM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
[Pierre Habouzit, 23.03.2007]
On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 05:08:22PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le vendredi 23 mars 2007 à 13:40 +0100, Piotr Ożarowski a écrit :
XB-Python-Type: multiple (compile for all installed
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 01:36:08PM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
[Tristan Seligmann, 22.03.2007]
* Pierre Habouzit [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-21 21:49:00 +0100]:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 09:25:52PM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
it's useful for Python applications that need specific Python
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 07:50:35PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 22 mars 2007 à 14:50 +0100, Pierre Habouzit a écrit :
exactly, putting current is just yet-another-place where the
maintainers declares that he will only prepare the package for current
python. And you're right
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 09:25:52PM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
[Pierre Habouzit, 21.03.2007]
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 08:28:47PM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
current keyword is deprecated? Why? I'm using it a lot and I like
it...
What are you using it for exactly ? I mean, please
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 10:38:30PM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
[Pierre Habouzit, 21.03.2007]
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 09:25:52PM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
it's useful for Python applications that need specific Python version.
f.e. if current Python version is 2.4 and my app
is going nowhere useful. We can avoid this easily, shall we ?
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgp0DpVKLrfwH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
to say. Having two things not really the same called
the same suck. I hardly see someone fork the openssl and say that the
new lib would be called libssl too. That would be disastrous. That's the
same here IMHO.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 03:51:20PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 11:16:14PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
If we don't, I don't see the purpose of the policy alltogether.
Allowing transitions between default versions of python without package
renames, bypassing NEW
-wavelets
no binNMU is needed here either for a default python change. It is
recommended for a python version removal (to avoid to waste space) and
needed for the introduction of a new python (to support the new one).
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 04:50:30PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 12:05:30AM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 03:51:20PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 11:16:14PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
If we don't, I don't see
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 12:53:27AM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
[Pierre Habouzit, 22.03.2007]
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 12:23:59AM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
* set XB-Python-Version to current, 2.5 # here current can't be
deprecated,
but this field should be filled
) and that must be fixed for etch.
(3) the solution is to rm -rf /usr/lib/python*/site-packages/mercurial/
(yes * because you presumably left python2.3 bytecode over too)
from the postinst. you will be able to drop that upgrade stanza
after the etch release.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
as root is enough to produce the
*.pyc if your package (even against the previous policy) did not managed
them.
To Wouter: to resolve your problem, just rm -rf
/usr/lib/python*/site-packages/mercurial. You can do that safely,
that'll solve your problem.
Cheers,
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O
same directory than the .py (or a symlink to it).
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgp9YXhqiQrdS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
compilation and
links creation for the pure modules, and that won't compile binary
extention either anyway (but maybe pygtk already forces it I don't know
I shall say, I've not checked).
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOO
-FDepends python2.3
is your friend.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgpNvN1WXBcfv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
need:
PYTHON=pythonX.Y ./configure .
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgphG0gflqbJW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Le ven 8 septembre 2006 14:51, Ludovic Rousseau a écrit :
Le 07.09.2006, à 16:55:59, Pierre Habouzit a écrit:
# sorry pal, but such a bug renders the package completely
unusable, and # is also a policy violation.
Why is the package completely unusable? I just see a complain by dpkg
or
dh_pycentral that will take care of the byte-compilation of your
package, and the transitions also.
wich seems to be already done.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp
Le lun 28 août 2006 09:12, Pierre Habouzit a écrit :
so to me, the harm looks quite small, given the fact that my
current experiments show that only a few packages do have an upper
bound, and do not use XS-P-V already.
the list of suck packages (run on a fresh local miror) is:
avahi
, if you do a
multi-build you should use python-all-dev.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgp6dhSCgeDIt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Le sam 26 août 2006 00:39, Pierre Habouzit a écrit :
Le ven 25 août 2006 22:26, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
Le vendredi 25 août 2006 à 13:09 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
I object to basing future work exclusively on dh_pysupport as
long as it implements your unilateral decision
not happen again thanks to the new policy, so that we can assume
that only *few* packages will not support the current version.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp
later.
python-support is written in python (same is true for python-central)
and will *always* depend upon 'python'
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
Le lun 21 août 2006 03:53, Russ Allbery a écrit :
Pierre Habouzit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
python-support is written in python (same is true for
python-central) and will *always* depend upon 'python'
Maybe some examples to illustrate will help. It may not be entirely
clear why the above
,it's not truly needed, it's needed iff a package do needs the
new provides or not.
and those reuploads are kind of binNMUs, the real problem here is that
tehre is no arch:all binNMU and maybe that's here the problem that need
fixing.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O
the examples should be in an annex, that follow 3.6 TOC so that
one can read the examples in front of the spec, without poluting the
spec.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
things, that should just work withoug duplicating
all the work.
now one has to take care of that, I don't know if anyone that has
packaging skills is interested into packaging stackless python. At
least, it does not sounds horrible, one has to give it a try I'd say.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O
the
common from vanilla python for the rest.
If that can work, I don't see any reason to refuse packaging stackless
(if anybody step up to do that btw).
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp
, and that has been explained
in my mail, and in Manoj doc with very good arguments.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgpMDMCZhpywz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
.
pyversions -vd will answer the short versions (2.3 today)
pyversions -d will answer python2.3
pyversions -s / -vs do the same with the supported versions.
It indeed is the preferred way to obtain those
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED
Le mar 8 août 2006 00:18, Pierre Habouzit a écrit :
§ 2.3.3, 2.4.2, 2.5.3, 2.6.2:
*here* the python$version alternative is correct,
because /extensions/ can be used with a '/usr/bin/python' as soon
as the python current version is in their supported range.
so take the previous
with the RM
team).
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgpYXThd7cENR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
://bugs.debian.org/from:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgpStUj93TdFU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
be no .pyo/.pyc in the packages you build, those are
created by pycentral at postinst / prerm time of your package, thanks
to debhelper magic.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp
Le mer 2 août 2006 20:09, Iustin Pop a écrit :
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:02:05PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Le mer 2 août 2006 19:51, Iustin Pop a écrit :
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 07:42:40PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
and the pyo and pyc files are generated by your build process
use restructured text. it depends what you want to
do exactly, and what the users of that syntax are likely to be able to
learn ;)
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
this have? Can the .deb be used or not?
It's harmless, though perhaps a pity that the python maintainers
decided on this ugly solution.
just FYI, it's not mandatory, one can use debian/pyversions instead
(with python-support).
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O
Le lun 24 juillet 2006 19:52, Adeodato Simó a écrit :
* Pierre Habouzit [Mon, 24 Jul 2006 17:11:14 +0200]:
just FYI, it's not mandatory [XB-Python-Version], one can use
debian/pyversions instead (with python-support).
Hm. I can see how debian/pyversions can substitute XS-Python-Version
are, and can't take such a decision.
Cheers,
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgpq4fjTi3Akf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
it to
dh_py{central,support}.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgpKPFWOA2FoU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Le sam 1 juillet 2006 00:19, Pierre Habouzit a écrit :
Le ven 30 juin 2006 21:03, Vincent Danjean a écrit :
Hi,
I'm converting one of my package (commit-tool) to the new policy.
I was thinking it will be easy, but I found several difficulties.
I'm able to deal with them so that I
!
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgpcBRpNK6Eec.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Le jeu 29 juin 2006 16:37, Sam Morris a écrit :
On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:25:17 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Le mer 28 juin 2006 23:20, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
So you don't have any excuse to not update your packages any more.
About 60% of the Python modules have already been updated
) to use a:
XS-Python-Standards-Version: 0.4
to specify the python policy the package is conforming to. that would
help transitions a lot, and help to keep track of future transition
statuses.
comments ?
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED
Le jeu 15 juin 2006 10:50, Piotr Ozarowski a écrit :
Pierre Habouzit ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
I'd like to suggest a last minute amendment to the Python Policy,
that would help further transitions a lot. I'd suggest that
packages uses a XS-Python-Standards-Version, that would'nt be
mandatory
Le jeu 15 juin 2006 13:36, Piotr Ozarowski a écrit :
Pierre Habouzit ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
well the thing is there is no way to track all the packages that
*have* to follow the python subpolicy, and that makes the work of
tracking them for transition harder.
I think/thought it makes
;[EMAIL PROTECTED]
adding a ;pend-exc=done gives a good list of what the TODO is ;)
Cheers,
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgpFXRFwUHgYp.pgp
Description: PGP
,
if the latter it will hide problems like the one above.
Is there anything planned to address that ?
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgprv4GVGAVi4.pgp
Description: PGP
Le Dim 9 Avril 2006 19:56, Pierre Habouzit a écrit :
Le Dim 9 Avril 2006 14:18, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:47:25PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
what's the policy about them ?
should the packages be built for python 2.3 and 2.4 ? only for
2.3 ? only for 2.4
on a embeded device just does not makes sense.
To me, this looks like a bad excuse.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgp744tnc1Bg5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
62 matches
Mail list logo
