Gregor Hoffleit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> currently, our Python packages mostly ship .py files and compile them into
> .pyc files at run time in order to save space in the debs.
The way you do it currently is fine. If people don't want pyc, they
can freely delete them.
I don't
Roland Mas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Maybe we could reuse the Emacs way? Ask Joey to add a dh_python,
> write up a /usr/lib/pythonen-common/python-install, and byte-compile
> at install-time for all the present flavours?
>
> Just an idea, of course.
We have already talked about using
Gregor Hoffleit (2001-03-23 21:39:07 +0100) :
> currently, our Python packages mostly ship .py files and compile
> them into .pyc files at run time in order to save space in the debs.
The Python situation sounds remarkably like the Emacs one, don't you
think? We have several (okay, two) flavours
On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 08:25:57AM +0200, Moshe Zadka wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Gregor Hoffleit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > currently, our Python packages mostly ship .py files and compile them into
> > ..pyc files at run time in order to save space in the debs.
> >
> > There's no reaso
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I do think we need somewhere where all the .pyc's are "registered",
>
> "locate .pyc"; or maybe locate .py, .pyc, and .pyo files, then
> reconcile the three lists.
I didn't say the file system isn't a good such place. I just said
we
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Moshe Zadka wrote:
<...>
> I do think we need somewhere where all the .pyc's are "registered",
"locate .pyc"; or maybe locate .py, .pyc, and .pyo files, then
reconcile the three lists.
> so when
> a new version of Python comes along, it can recompile them, since pycs
> are no
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 09:39:07PM +0100, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> I wonder if I should debconf-ify python-base and add an debconf option that
> sets a system-wide policy about how to deal with .py/.pyc files. That could
> be one of:
>
> * install both .py and .pyc files
> * install only .pyc
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Gregor Hoffleit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> currently, our Python packages mostly ship .py files and compile them into
> ..pyc files at run time in order to save space in the debs.
>
> There's no reason, though, to keep the .py files on machines that only
> deploy software[
I think this sounds good. Then users who don't want to use the extra
disk space don't have to.
There is another tradeoff though. I compared the size of several .py
and the corresponding .pyc files from the standard library and noticed
that the .pyc file is a little bit larger. If the user li
Hi,
currently, our Python packages mostly ship .py files and compile them into
.pyc files at run time in order to save space in the debs.
There's no reason, though, to keep the .py files on machines that only
deploy software[1]
I wonder if I should debconf-ify python-base and add an debconf opti
10 matches
Mail list logo
