Re: Zope Debian package?

1999-02-20 Thread Matthias Klose
Gregor Hoffleit writes: Hi, since a few people asked: [... yope package] what about of packaging python-1.5.2b2 first? (Or did I miss this one ;-) How many packages need to be ported/changed? As far as I can remember zope requires (?) python1.5.2b2 in some places (or was it IDLE?)

intent to package VTK

2000-03-20 Thread Matthias Klose
Maitland Bottoms writes: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I have a start on packaging The Visualization Toolkit, as described at http://www.kitware.com/vtk.html Interested persons may see my preliminary efforts at http://master.debian.org/~bottoms/debs/

distutils Debian packages

2000-07-05 Thread Matthias Klose
Greg Ward writes: On 29 June 2000, Matthias Klose said: Debian is more strict in makeing packages (see the Debian packaging manual and the debian policy). http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/packaging.html/ http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ Oh good, I'll

python-2.1 for unstable?

2001-05-21 Thread Matthias Klose
ok, python-2.1. was released some time ago. When and how will it appear in unstable? IMO it doesn't make sense to support python2.0 AND python2.1 in unstable. Therefore I propose to drop 2.0 in unstable and upload 2.1. There seem to be two ways how this can be done: - new packages names

Re: python-2.1 for unstable?

2001-05-24 Thread Matthias Klose
Florian Weimer writes: This is probably correct, but it is completely irrelevant in our case. Some parts of Python 2.1 are still covered by the GPL-incompatible CNRI license, so Python 2.1 as a whole is not GPL compatible. which parts exactly?

Experimental Python 2.1 packages, release plans

2001-05-24 Thread Matthias Klose
Gregor Hoffleit writes: I have uploaded experimental Python 2.1 packages. Grab them at http://people.debian.org/~flight/python2/ thanks! Now the problems start if neither 2.0.1 nor 2.1.1 would be ready in time. If it's obious early that the won't be ready in time, we could start

RE: Package name question - pyada or python-pyada?

2001-06-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry writes: I have filed an ITP for pyAda which is an Ada wrapper to allow Python to be embedded and extended with Ada. Since pyada contains no python code I was going to name the package pyada instead of python-pyada, or am I wrong about the usage of 'python-' in a

python 'release21-maint' branch GPL with changed license

2001-07-07 Thread Matthias Klose
Looking at http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/python/python/dist/src/LICENSE?only_with_tag=release21-maint you see that the changed license is in the python-2.1 maintanance branch as well. What about python packages based on this branch? I has the advantage of a recent version which

(another set of) experimental packages (1.5, 2.1, 2.2a4)

2001-10-03 Thread Matthias Klose
In http://master.debian.org/~doko/python you find another set of experimental packages for python. These packages are derived of the packages from Gregor Hoffleit at http://people.debian.org/~flight. Major changes are: - converted python1.5-doc package - new python2.1-doc package - add missing

Re: (another set of) experimental packages (1.5, 2.1, 2.2a4)

2001-10-05 Thread Matthias Klose
Donovan Baarda writes: Some other questions; what happens with other packages that might/might not have installed stuff into /usr/lib/python1.5? Will they break? No. However the priority of the python alternative from 1.5 should greater than the prio of the pyton from 2.x (at least for some

Re: Python packages in incoming

2001-10-14 Thread Matthias Klose
Jérôme Marant writes: What about proposal and policy from Neil and his efforts? - the proposed packaging scheme doesn't allow smooth upgrades between one python version and a next version. compare python-1.5 to libc5 and python-2.1 to libc6. there was a clear upgrade procedure to do the

Re: Python packages in incoming

2001-10-14 Thread Matthias Klose
Jérôme Marant writes: Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jérôme Marant writes: What about proposal and policy from Neil and his efforts? - the proposed packaging scheme doesn't allow smooth upgrades between one python version and a next version. compare python-1.5 to libc5

Re: Python packages in incoming

2001-10-15 Thread Matthias Klose
Donovan Baarda writes: Quoting Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Jérôme Marant writes: What about proposal and policy from Neil and his efforts? - the proposed packaging scheme doesn't allow smooth upgrades between one python version and a next version. compare python-1.5

Re: What should we do now?

2001-10-16 Thread Matthias Klose
[Currently I am unable to read new incoming mails ... I'll respond later to other messages] Just uploaded a new python1.5 NMU which fixes three bugs I introduced. Jérôme Marant writes: What should python modules packagers do now? Should we stop providing support for python2 and provide

Re: Second report: latest python in unstable broke my packages

2001-10-16 Thread Matthias Klose
Bastian Kleineidam writes: Jérôme Marant wrote: I said previously that the upgrade when OK. This is true, but I hadn't look further at that moment. My upgrade had some errors: No errors. The postinst just compiled the testsuite. Btw, do we really need the testsuite as a

Re: libwxgtk2.2-python

2001-10-16 Thread Matthias Klose
Ron writes: On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 11:39:38AM +0200, Tille, Andreas wrote: If you think that two separate wxgtk versions are really necessary please speak now because Ron is preparing packages for a new version. Just to be completely clear about this, I almost certainly will not

Re: Python upgrade path (draft/proposal)

2001-10-18 Thread Matthias Klose
May I suggest a simpler alternative for (b) (or maybe an alternative c): Make package python-XXX containing support for both python 1.5 and python 2.1. For each python {1.5,2.1} that is installed, bytecompile the package's .py files on install. Since we use

Debian Python policy Upgrade Path (draft/proposal)

2001-10-18 Thread Matthias Klose
Python Policy Neil Schemenauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] version 0.3

Re: Debian Python policy Upgrade Path (draft/proposal)

2001-10-21 Thread Matthias Klose
Carey Evans writes: Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] 2.4. Dependencies - Packaged modules must depend on `python-base ( X.Y)' and `python-base ( X2.Y2)'. (= X.Y), right? Shouldn't this explain just what X2.Y2 is? I assume it's

Re: Debian Python policy Upgrade Path (draft/proposal)

2001-10-21 Thread Matthias Klose
Donovan Baarda writes: On Sun, Oct 21, 2001 at 10:27:54AM +1300, Carey Evans wrote: Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] exactly. But you see that these packages will break when you try to upgrade. We can't make 2.1 the default right now, because we will _silently_

Re: Debian Python policy Upgrade Path (draft/proposal)

2001-10-21 Thread Matthias Klose
['iceme'] Ron Lee ron at debian.org ['libwxgtk2.2-python'] Danie Roux droux at tuks.co.za ['garchiver'] Matthias Klose doko at debian.org ['python-numeric', 'python-numeric-tutorial', 'python-distutils'] Roland Mas lolando at debian.org ['python-orbit-dev', 'python-orbit'] Joe Reinhardt jmr at debian.org

Re: Debian Python policy Upgrade Path (draft/proposal)

2001-10-21 Thread Matthias Klose
Donovan Baarda writes: Good point... I'd forgotten about that. This means we might as well go strait to python2.1 as the default, but make sure that the python2.1-xxx packages have versioned conflicts with all the packages that depend on just python or python-base and install into

Re: What should we do now?

2001-10-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Gregor Hoffleit writes: Regarding (2): Making the dependency explicit (by using /usr/bin/python1.5) is just playing safe. As far as I can see, if we hadn't the legacy of the existing packages and installations, and if versioned dependencies would work on all systems in all situations, we

Re: What should we do now?

2001-10-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Anthony Towns writes: On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 06:13:31PM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote: Regarding (1): If you ask me how common the situation is that people install local Python versions in /usr/local, then I will ask you how common it is that it's reasonable that a script provided by

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Jérôme Marant writes: Gregor Hoffleit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've put a version 0.3.6 of the Python Policy Draft on http://people.debian.org/~flight/python/. The version is still a little bit rough and sometimes incomplete, but it already gives a good outline of the Python packaging

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Joel Rosdahl writes: Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It let's a package depend on: python (= 2.1), python ( 2.2), python-foo and can expect a working default Python version, which has support for python-foo. You mean python, python-foo I presume? You may

Re: Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Chris Lawrence writes: - I'm not sure in 2.1.2.2 that /usr/lib/python/site-packages is a good name... maybe /usr/share/python/site-packages instead. (After all, the things should be arch independent.) I'd be happy to code up the symlink thingamajig for 2.1.2.2 if nobody's working on it. See

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Jérôme Marant writes: Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 2.1.1 Support Only The Default Version + does this Depends: python (= X.Y), python ( X.Y+1) really work since versioned provides do not exist yet? Isn't it python-base rather than python ? yes. python

FYI: Mail to python package maintainers

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
together with the new Python packages. We hope to make a smooth upgrade from 1.5 to 2.1 and provide a current Python version with bells, whistles and packages for woody. Matthias Klose (and Gregor Hoffleit).

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Carey Evans writes: From Appendix B.2: The new packages will conflict with every Python dependent package, that does depend on `python', `python-base', without depending on `python ( 1.6)' or `python-base ( 2.1)'. Since the new packages conflict with python-base

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Jérôme Marant writes: Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But I don't want all my python packages to be uninstalled because python changed. This is unacceptable. So you simply set the new python packages on hold, until all packages you need are converted. What's wrong

Re: Packaging python-egenix-mx*

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Federico Di Gregorio writes: On Sun, 2001-10-28 at 22:34, Joel Rosdahl wrote: Questions: 1. Does anyone need Python 1.5 versions of these packages? Packages I have found that are associated with some of the mx packages are: python-mysqldb (Suggests:

Re: Python conflicts

2001-11-04 Thread Matthias Klose
Baruch Even writes: Hello, I've noticed that python package conflicts with LyX, I've also seen the discussion on the python policy but couldn't understand the exact reasons for this action and how to solve it. I'd appreciate some explanation, it is also a good idea to file bug reports on

Re: what to do about python-kjbuckets

2001-11-04 Thread Matthias Klose
Joel Rosdahl writes: 5) Use date in version, i.e. 2.2.port.20011104 or similar. (Best solution I can come up with.) but use something like 2.2.0.port.011104, so you don't need an epoch for the next official 2.2.1 version.

Re: Bug#118916: wajig: should depend on python, not python-base

2001-11-11 Thread Matthias Klose
Dirk Eddelbuettel writes: Ben == Ben Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ben Package: wajig Version: N/A; reported 2001-11-09 Severity: serious Ben Ben Hi. Package wajig cannot be installed because it depends on the Ben non-existant python-base. Python packages have recently been

Removal of python1.5?

2001-12-09 Thread Matthias Klose
It looks like the move to python (v2.1) is done. There are three packages remaining: - pydb: http://bugs.debian.org/119203 Not yet ported to 2.1, but we do have an alterbate debugger available (idle). - python-pam: http://bugs.debian.org/119213 See

Re: Removal of python1.5?

2001-12-09 Thread Matthias Klose
dman writes: On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 08:00:20PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: | It looks like the move to python (v2.1) is done. There are three | packages remaining: Also gadfly depends on 1.5. Unfortunately it appears stagnant upstream (last release in '98). The testsuite passes for 2.1

Re: Removal of python1.5?

2001-12-09 Thread Matthias Klose
Mikhail Sobolev writes: On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 08:00:20PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: - python-pam: http://bugs.debian.org/119213 See http://ftp-master.debian.org/~doko/python for a try. However I couldn't get it reliably working ... Could you please give more details

Re: Removal of python1.5?

2001-12-10 Thread Matthias Klose
Anthony Towns writes: On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 08:00:20PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: If I don't hear a serious reason to keep python1.5, I plan to file a bug report for ftp.debian.org to remove the python1.5 package. Eh? python1.5's still useful to users, isn't it, especially ones

Re: Removal of python1.5?

2001-12-10 Thread Matthias Klose
Donovan Baarda writes: On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 11:53:24AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 08:00:20PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: If I don't hear a serious reason to keep python1.5, I plan to file a bug report for ftp.debian.org to remove the python1.5 package. Eh

Re: Removal of python1.5?

2001-12-10 Thread Matthias Klose
Kim Oldfield writes: On 10 Dec 2001, Matthias Klose typed: ] Anthony Towns writes: ] Dropping python1.5 doesn't seem a particularly clever thing to do. ] If we don't have any python1.5 dependencies, why not? Because users will have no way of having both 1.5 and 2.1 on the same machine

Re: Removal of python1.5?

2001-12-12 Thread Matthias Klose
hmm, then we have to keep zope 2.1 as well (the version from potato). Why do you want to keep 2.3, not 2.2? Why not 2.5? IMO If you have a mission critical application, which is incompatible among zope versions, then you should install your own zope. Am I wrong here? Jim Penny writes: I have a

Re: Python 2.0.1; transition plans for woody

2001-06-25 Thread Matthias Klose
Gregor Hoffleit writes: On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 05:37:36PM +0200, Radovan Garabik wrote: I agree, but... why not wait until python 2.1.1 is released? (or, if we just discuss things a bit, it will be released before any action is taken and we can jump right to it :-)) sure, the

Intent for NMU of python-2.1 packages

2001-09-03 Thread Matthias Klose
As David Maslen pointed out in http://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2001/debian-python-200109/msg0.html Debian doesn't have yet python-2.1 in it's distro, although released in June (2.1) and July (2.1.1). Gregor (the python-1.5 and python-2.0 maintainer) has put experimental packages at

report #128349

2002-01-08 Thread Matthias Klose
ok, I'm giving up, just wanted to finish the python transition. please could somebody look at #128349?

Re: pure python modules - Python Policy 2.2.3

2002-01-13 Thread Matthias Klose
Torsten Landschoff writes: On Sun, Jan 13, 2002 at 03:48:40PM +0100, Bastian Kleineidam wrote: I have untested scripts python.postinst and python.prerm for this. If you ask me, scripts for that should go into the python package so that not every python-xxx package has to carry them itself.

Re: Bug#128957: *.py[co] files are architecture independent

2002-01-16 Thread Matthias Klose
Matt Zimmerman writes: On Sun, Jan 13, 2002 at 10:00:23PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: - wajig uses /usr/bin/python as interpreter and therefore should depend on python (= 2.1), python ( 2.2). Same for the build dependency. Why is python ( 2.2) necessary? apt-listchanges

tmda

2002-02-19 Thread Matthias Klose
reopen 128531 thanks From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam D. McKenna) Changes: tmda (0.46-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release * Package split into 3 packages to help attempt to conform to Debian's braindead Python policy. New packages are: python-tmda (Python

Re: Bug#128531: tmda

2002-02-20 Thread Matthias Klose
Adam McKenna writes: On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 12:55:59AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: reopen 128531 thanks From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam D. McKenna) Changes: tmda (0.46-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release * Package split into 3 packages to help

Re: Please test new 4suite

2002-04-07 Thread Matthias Klose
Jérôme Marant writes: Sean 'Shaleh' Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: we SHOULD be able to fix this ourselves, I just do not know enough about distutils yet to tackle it. I asked about this on the 4suite mailing list because I don't really know what can be done with distutils (if ever

Re: Please test new 4suite

2002-04-07 Thread Matthias Klose
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry writes: apt-cache showpkg doesn't show any reverse dependencies for 4suite, so an upload might be safe ... Well, some api changed. It might not be reasonnable ... consider people using it as a depends for software not in Debian. with this argument you may

Re: where is policy?

2002-04-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Bastian Kleineidam writes: On Sun, Apr 28, 2002 at 04:30:49PM -0500, dman wrote: I did a google search and a search using the engine on debian.org but I can't find the Official Python Policy document anywhere. I did find Neil's draft version 0.1 proposal with no trouble, but I'm looking

Re: Packaging, supporting both 2.1 and 2.2

2002-05-22 Thread Matthias Klose
Moshe Zadka writes: On Wed, 22 May 2002, Bastian Kleineidam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 12:09:11PM -, Moshe Zadka wrote: a) python2.1-foo: python foo.py module for 2.1 Depends: python2.1 b) python2.2-foo: python foo.py module for 2.2 Depends: python2.2

Re: debian python packages

2002-07-12 Thread Matthias Klose
[forwarding to debian-python] using distutils out of the box seems to be difficult, because many upstream packages are broken down in several binary packages and because distutils out of the box only builds for one python version. Not sure which package to look at for a start ... Tom Hall

Re: Emacs in build-depends of python2.1

2002-07-14 Thread Matthias Klose
Florent Rougon writes: Bastian Kleineidam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: python2.1 (2.1.3-3) from sid py2texi.el is a generated file it is included in debian/patches/info-docs.dpatch the fixinfo.el is replaced by it, fixinfo.el is not run. OK, py2texi and fixinfo have nothing in common.

Re: python2.2 for sarge?

2002-07-25 Thread Matthias Klose
Federico Di Gregorio [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Il gio, 2002-07-25 alle 16:04, Hugo van der Merwe ha scritto: Sorry, I've not checked for existing threads on this topic... will Sarge use Python2.2 by any chance? Once this is decided, the sooner it is made official, the sooner packages will start

Re: experimental python2.3 packages

2002-08-03 Thread Matthias Klose
Jérôme Marant writes: Bastian Kleineidam [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Missing depends on libstdc++4: Setting up python2.3 (2.2.90-1) ... /usr/bin/python2.3: error while loading shared libraries: libstdc++.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory It is strange

Re: experimental python2.3 packages

2002-08-03 Thread Matthias Klose
Jérôme Marant writes: BTW, why is libstdc++ suddenly required? Are there some bits of C++ in the upcoming release of python? the main program Modules/ccpython.cc is compiled with g++-3.1. No other dependencies. hmm, I am sure, there was a bug report filed to link against libstdc++...

Re: Please remove python1.5 from unstable

2002-08-24 Thread Matthias Klose
Donovan Baarda writes: On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 06:35:02PM +0200, Martin Sj?gren wrote: fre 2002-08-23 klockan 18.28 skrev Jim Penny: What packages do you have in mind? Some of the c-extension maintainers, myself included, have an informal policy of support everything in the

python-central comments

2002-08-24 Thread Matthias Klose
Some comments: - python-central should have a configuration option, how files are compiled. Most users don't need compilation with -O. Maybe a debconf option? - A separate command to install a python version would be useful. Assume I rename the packages again, or you want it to use for

Re: python-central comments

2002-08-26 Thread Matthias Klose
Donovan Baarda writes: On Sat, Aug 24, 2002 at 07:48:31PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: Some comments: - python-central should have a configuration option, how files are compiled. Most users don't need compilation with -O. Maybe a debconf option? Hmm, could be done I guess

Re: python-central comments

2002-08-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Bastian Kleineidam writes: On Sat, Aug 24, 2002 at 07:48:31PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: Some comments: - python-central should have a configuration option, how files are compiled. Most users don't need compilation with -O. I will have commandline options for this, so the module

Re: python2.2-dev depends on gcc-3.2. WHY?

2002-08-30 Thread Matthias Klose
Tom Cato Amundsen writes: Why does python2.2-dev 2.2.1-9 depend on gcc-3.2 ? It was requested that python is built with C++ support. That means cxxmain is compiled with g++ and python is linked with g++. g++-3.2 changed the C++ ABI, so I made both changes (python and C++) at the same time.

NMU for python-happydoc

2002-09-07 Thread Matthias Klose
I'm preparing a NMU for python-happydoc for tonight. qm fails to build, because python-happydoc isn't installable anymore.

Re: dependencies of non-module packages

2002-09-08 Thread Matthias Klose
Graham Wilson writes: On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 09:08:36AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: Until dpkg supports triggers, I think what the emacsen does it the most sane -- I'd be really, really happy if python modules/apps were what do the emacsen do? Don't know, maybe Tollef can explain?

Re: Maintaining Python 1.5

2002-09-10 Thread Matthias Klose
Moshe Zadka writes: I was wondering if you mind passing Python 1.5 maintainership to me. I do not mind passing the maintainership, but I do mind keeping it in unstable. Debian is not a museum for old python versions. What hinders you to install the python1.5 packages from woody in unstable? apt

Re: Maintaining Python 1.5

2002-09-11 Thread Matthias Klose
Neil Schemenauer writes: Matthias Klose wrote: Moshe Zadka writes: I was wondering if you mind passing Python 1.5 maintainership to me. I do not mind passing the maintainership, but I do mind keeping it in unstable. I don't think it is up to individual Debian developers to decide

Packages not installable in unstable

2002-09-13 Thread Matthias Klose
The python default version changed to 2.2 in unstable. Your package depends on python (= 2.1), python ( 2.2) which makes it uninstallable in unstable. Please either - check that your packages works with python2.2 and change the dependency to python (= 2.2), python ( 2.3) -

Re: Python upgrade, dependencies of python-numeric

2002-09-26 Thread Matthias Klose
Hugo van der Merwe writes: I was just about to post a big explanation...again, when I saw you had figured it out :-) Does anyone think the Python policy need a bit more explanation here? would some use-cases help? I think that would be a good idea, probably. To try to avoid having

Re: python-central 0.4

2002-10-03 Thread Matthias Klose
Donovan Baarda writes: I wouldn't call moving some files the packaging hell, and I have yet to understand why /usr/lib/mailman is so much saner or better than /usr/lib/python/site-packages/mailman. I looked into the mailman package. It should not be that much work to adapt it to the

Re: NMU's for uninstallable python-* packages

2002-10-03 Thread Matthias Klose
=?iso-8859-15?B?Suly9G1l?= Marant writes: On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 05:36:22PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: Hi, There are still about 20 packages not installable in sid due to the change of the default python version. Asking for NMUs now, probably for the next bug squashing party

Package uninstallable in unstable

2002-10-16 Thread Matthias Klose
Package: sqlrelay Version: 1:0.32-1 Severity: grave Original announcement at http://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2002/debian-python-200209/msg00030.html however I missed sqlrelay. You need to keep the python2.1 package (zope uses python2.1). Please build a python2.2-sqlrelay package as well

Re: Policy problem

2002-11-15 Thread Matthias Klose
Evan Simpson writes: I'm running into dependency clashes while trying to install wxPython, and looking for help. Since I am a Zope developer, and different versions of Zope rely on different versions of Python, I need to have several versions of Python installed. In fact, I have

Re: Python rexec and Bastion flaws

2003-01-20 Thread Matthias Klose
Bastian Kleineidam writes: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I just read this Post from Guido van Rossum[1] that the rexec.py and Bastian.py modules have severe security flaws. These modules will be disabled in the next 2.2 and 2.3 releases to avoid security risks. [1]

Re: RC wxwindows reports preventing python 2.1 - 2.2 transition

2003-04-05 Thread Matthias Klose
Ron writes: What about removing wxwindows2.3 from unstable. AFAICR this was a development release anyway. Same for 2.2, no other packages seem to depend on this version anymore. Yes, they are certainly candidates for removal asap. When I looked yesterday poedit still showed up in the

Re: python-debconf, Byte compilation and other questions

2003-04-18 Thread Matthias Klose
Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis writes: On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 10:02:39AM +0200, Tim Dijkstra wrote: 1) Should I ship .py or .pyc or both in the package. Byte-compile at install time? Ask user what to do? Ok, just saw a few other messages on this, my conclusion: Byte-compile at install

Re: python-debconf, Byte compilation and other questions

2003-04-18 Thread Matthias Klose
Bastian Kleineidam writes: On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 12:25:08PM +0200, Tim Dijkstra wrote: On Fri, 18 Apr 2003 11:22:11 +0200 Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: file:///usr/share/doc/python/python-policy.txt.gz (that is shipped with the python package). Maybe

Re: python-debconf, Byte compilation and other questions

2003-04-19 Thread Matthias Klose
Donovan Baarda writes: On Fri, 2003-04-18 at 19:54, Matthias Klose wrote: [...] And/or take a look at dh_python, which does all this for free... BTW, where can we find this? I'd like to take a look. Included in debhelper.

Re: Python mkhowto and friends

2003-06-02 Thread Matthias Klose
As I am away the next two weeks, is somebody interested to make a patch to build such a package from the python source? Fabian Fagerholm writes: Hi! I've been working on packaging Albatross, a web application toolkit for Python (see ITP: #193574). Albatross has very nice documentation that

Re: Bug#197875: python2.3: module dbm is missing

2003-06-19 Thread Matthias Klose
Encolpe DEGOUTE writes: Package: python2.3 Version: 2.2.104-1beta1.1 Severity: important Tags: sid Module dbm.so is missing in sid build. That's correct. The db1 compat headers aren't available anymore. Is there really a need to have this module? why not use the anydbm module (or

Re: Bug#197871: Bug#197875: python2.3: module dbm is missing

2003-06-19 Thread Matthias Klose
Encolpe DEGOUTE writes: And the module is always in the list of base modules for python2.3 ??? there is no such list of base modules. We need python 2.2 and 2.3 for testing Zope 2.7 and 3alpha releases, and my boss needs dbm for looking after our job. zope really needs this module and

Re: /usr/include/python

2003-08-07 Thread Matthias Klose
Roland Stigge writes: Hi, why isn't there a default /usr/include/python (possibly accomplished as a symlink in the package python-dev, like /usr/bin/python in the package python)? (I'm sure there is a reason for that, I just didn't find it documented somewhere.) it's not needed. distutils

Re: version independent pythin packages: ?

2003-08-08 Thread Matthias Klose
Ricardo Javier Cardenes Medina writes: Of course, all this require manual handling from the user. What I was proposing would require a whole PEP and some reasonable design and implementation, etc, so Python itself could map those .pyc to their original file, only resorting to them if the

using debhelper's dh_python and python-2.3

2003-08-08 Thread Matthias Klose
If you use debhelper's dh_python, please make sure you use debhelper (= 4.1.60), which will be in the archives tonight. Matthias

Re: python 2.2 to python 2.3 transition

2003-08-10 Thread Matthias Klose
This seems to be a common misunderstanding. Therefore the CC to debian-python that I have something as a reference. Lars Wirzenius writes: On la, 2003-08-09 at 03:22, Matthias Klose wrote: Please upgrade your packages soon, or ask on debian-python for NMU's or help. If the package doesn't

Re: python 2.2 to python 2.3 transition

2003-08-10 Thread Matthias Klose
Lars Wirzenius writes: Um, yeah, it does contain a .pyc. I don't think it should: the postinst compiles the eoc.py file. The inclusion of the .pyc file seems like a bug due to unforeseen interaction with the upstream Makefile's install target. I'll have to remove the .pyc from the .deb in the

Re: #!/usr/bin/python2.3 vs #!/usr/bin/env python2.3

2003-08-11 Thread Matthias Klose
John Goerzen writes: Hello, Many Python programs use constructs like #!/usr/bin/env python2.3 to load themselves. Many others use #!/usr/bin/python2.3. On most Debian systems, these are the same. The submitter in #189473 claims that #!/usr/bin/env python2.3 is wrong because he has his

Re: python transition summary

2003-08-12 Thread Matthias Klose
Josselin Mouette writes: I've put a summary of packages needing a rebuild in a world-writable file at http://people.debian.org/~joss/python-list.txt python-numarray-ext = updated but the new package misses python (= 2.3), python ( 2.4) unneeded, as it depends on python-numarray. anyway,

Filing RC reports for python-* packages

2003-08-15 Thread Matthias Klose
Joss, please could you update your transition summary (modulo the packages already in queue/new) and file RC bugs on all python-* packages, which cannot be installed. Many of these are needed as dependencies for other packages. If this is done, we may start filing RC reports for all other

dropping python-stats from unstable?

2003-08-19 Thread Matthias Klose
The package doesn't seem to be maintained, there's no upstream source given in the copyright file, the closest I could find is http://pynms.sourceforge.net/ And the pstats module shadows a standard module of the same name. Joss, you did the last NMU. Any opinions? Matthias

python-pmw outdated (0.8), current is 1.2

2003-08-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Package: python-pmw Just saw, that 0.8 is already 20 months old. Somebody volunteering to package the current version?

Re: pygtk transition

2003-09-01 Thread Matthias Klose
Sebastien Bacher writes: Hello, The new pygtk 1.2 packages are available: python-gtk-1.2 python-gnome-1.2 python-glade-1.2 python-gdk-imlib-1.2 Package which have some depends on old packages (python-gtk/gnome/glade/gdk-imlib) have to update them. Don't forget to check that py

python-qt2 build failures

2003-09-06 Thread Matthias Klose
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 01:38:23 +0100 you wrote: PyQt 3.7 is supposed to be released this weekend. Then I'll updated fixed packages. this seems to be a long weekend :-( in the meantime pyQt 3.8 was released. would you mind fixing the FTBFS bug, or should the package marked for removal from

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-09 Thread Matthias Klose
Andreas Rottmann writes: Hi! I wonder how long source packages that build binary packages for multiple versions (2.{1,2,3}) should continue to build packages for the old Python versions. IMHO, this should be documented somewhere (Policy?). Is there any timeline how long Python 2.2 and 2.1

zope 2.6.2 in Debian?

2003-09-09 Thread Matthias Klose
Now that 2.6.2 is released: - will you switch to python2.2 as the python interpreter used? - or maybe will you wait for 2.7 to be released, which uses python2.3?

autoconf1.4 on escher/unstable

2003-09-09 Thread Matthias Klose
please could somebody install this? Thanks, Matthias

Re: Python transition

2003-10-07 Thread Matthias Klose
John Goerzen writes: Hello, I hope I am not alone in this. I find the whole Python transition process to be rather confusing. For instance, I recently received an e-mail asking me not to upload various Python packages. A day later, one of them got NMU'd. I am confused; what exactly is

Re: Python transition

2003-10-07 Thread Matthias Klose
John Goerzen writes: On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 07:18:41PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: The e-mail I sent made several exceptions from the freeze, one of them fixing RC reports. So yes, you are supposed to fix these problems yourself. As I introduced this RC in 0.5.1-5.1, I fixed it in 0.5.1

Re: freezing python packages until python-2.3 becomes the default in testing

2003-10-10 Thread Matthias Klose
Ron writes: Howdy, Forgive my apparent ignorance here, but I'm a little confused if I read Matthias' message correctly. I don't understand how uploading a new libwxgtk2.4-python package (which build-deps on python2.3) might hold up python from entering testing. Python doesn't depend on

Re: freezing python packages until python-2.3 becomes the default in testing

2003-10-11 Thread Matthias Klose
Josselin Mouette writes: Le ven 10/10/2003 =E0 14:02, Ron a =E9crit : On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 08:03:32PM -0400, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote: The libwxgtk2.4-python in testing depends on python (2.2). =20 Ahh, ok. This is the piece of the vicious cycle I was overlooking. =20 I've just

  1   2   3   4   >