On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 12:09:59PM +0200, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> Anthony Roach wrote:
> Exactly. With Python 2.1 you will have to make a 2.1 compatible .deb
> package.
OK.
> Make a suggestion, a recommendation is too hard as some users might want to
> stick
>
> to a single Python installa
Anthony Roach wrote:
So when there is a Debian package for Python 2.1, will I have to have a
python21-scons that depends on python << 2.2, python >= 2.1? I'm assuming I do,
because Python 2.1 will use /usr/lib/python2.1 rather than
/usr/lib/python2.0.
Exactly. With Python 2.1 you will have to make
On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 03:12:35PM +0200, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> > 1) Should I byte compile the scons script?
>
> No. I assume its a shell script called /usr/bin/scons. There is no need
> to byte-compile it.
It's actually a Python script. Currently it has a lot of code in it (to parse
argume
Anthony,
Anthony Roach wrote:
1) Should I byte compile the scons script?
No. I assume its a shell script called /usr/bin/scons. There is no need
to byte-compile it.
2) Since the SCons.* modules work fine in all versions of Python supported by
all current versions of Debian, can I put them in som
On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 09:05:07PM -0500, Anthony Roach wrote:
> 4) libSCons (why put the -python on? There isn't ever going to be a non-python
>version if libSCons).
Well, after some trial and error, I realized I can't name a binary package
libSCons, because the name has to be all lower case.
I'm trying to create a Debian package for the program SCons
(http://www.scons.org). SCons is written entirely in Python and works with
Python versions 1.5.2 through 2.1.1. The SCons program consists of a script
named scons and a set of extension modules named SCons.*. I've decided to
package the sc
6 matches
Mail list logo
