Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew,
I see in the latest postings where setuptools is breaking with Python
2.6.3. Can you switch 'stdeb' over to using Distribute, which is being
actively maintained?
As I understand it, installing Distribute installs a package called
setuptools. Therefore, my
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew, how can I generate the .deb package without the leading
'python-' in the name? Is this configurable?
Yes. The 'Package' option. Described in Customizing the produced Debian
source package (config options) in the README.rst.
Ok, in my
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew, how can I generate the .deb package without the leading
'python-' in the name? Is this configurable?
Yes. The 'Package' option. Described in Customizing the produced Debian
source package (config options) in the README.rst.
Ok,
Olof Bjarnason olof.bjarna...@gmail.com writes:
I guess sdist_* stands for source distribution, and likewise
bdist_* stands for binary distribution?
Why are you guessing? You've been researching Python's distutils since
several days ago, no? These terms are in the documentation you were
2009/9/29 Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au:
Olof Bjarnason olof.bjarna...@gmail.com writes:
I guess sdist_* stands for source distribution, and likewise
bdist_* stands for binary distribution?
Why are you guessing? You've been researching Python's distutils since
several days ago, no?
Gerry Reno wrote:
I have attached a replacement 'bdist_deb.py' file that permits passing
arguments to bdist_deb which in turn passes them down to sdist_dsc.
and a util.py diff (made against the gerry-reno git branch) makes the
setup_env_vars work for both the line statements as well as the
Olof Bjarnason wrote:
OK I came a little further apt-get:ing debhelper and python-all-dev,
then issuing
sudo python -c import stdeb; execfile('setup.py') bdist_deb
.. but it ended with this:
dpkg-deb - fel: (upstream) version (dev) innehåller inga siffror
The English translation of
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
I have attached a replacement 'bdist_deb.py' file that permits passing
arguments to bdist_deb which in turn passes them down to sdist_dsc.
and a util.py diff (made against the gerry-reno git branch) makes the
setup_env_vars work for
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Ok, here's what happens if I DON'T use the option (shown with the old
code - same logic):
$ python setup.py bdist_deb
...
running build_scripts
...
if test 2.5 = 2.5 -o 2.5 = 2.4; then \
export SVEMOPT=--single-version-externally-managed
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Then I'm ok then with having 'bdist_deb' be the name and using the
plugin approach.
Andrew, what do you think about this solution?
It's already committed as of a couple days ago in the old-stable
branch and I just merged it into the master branch.
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Then I'm ok then with having 'bdist_deb' be the name and using the
plugin approach.
Andrew, what do you think about this solution?
It's already committed as of a couple days ago in the old-stable
branch and I just merged it
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Then I'm ok then with having 'bdist_deb' be the name and using the
plugin approach.
Andrew, what do you think about this solution?
It's already committed as of a couple days ago in the
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Then I'm ok then with having 'bdist_deb' be the name and using the
plugin approach.
Andrew, what do you think about this solution?
It's already committed as of a
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Then I'm ok then with having 'bdist_deb' be the name and using the
plugin approach.
Andrew, what do you think about this
2009/9/28 Gerry Reno gr...@verizon.net:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Then I'm ok then with having 'bdist_deb' be the name and using the
plugin approach.
Andrew, what do you think about this
Olof Bjarnason wrote:
2009/9/28 Gerry Reno gr...@verizon.net:
Just pass the arguments directly to sdist_dsc. It should be something
like this:
python setup.py sdist_dsc --ignore-single-version-externally-managed
--ignore-install-requires bdist_deb
How's that going to work? You
Andrew Straw wrote:
Olof Bjarnason wrote:
2009/9/28 Gerry Reno gr...@verizon.net:
Just pass the arguments directly to sdist_dsc. It should be something
like this:
python setup.py sdist_dsc --ignore-single-version-externally-managed
--ignore-install-requires bdist_deb
How's that
2009/9/28 Gerry Reno gr...@verizon.net:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Olof Bjarnason wrote:
2009/9/28 Gerry Reno gr...@verizon.net:
Just pass the arguments directly to sdist_dsc. It should be something
like this:
python setup.py sdist_dsc --ignore-single-version-externally-managed
Olof Bjarnason wrote:
Ok, the commands behave like makefile rules, once run they don't run again.
But there are still several issues here:
Remember that I said that my goal with 'bdist_deb' was for users to have a
SINGLE command to generate a .deb.
What needs to be achieved is for a command
Gerry Reno wrote:
Olof Bjarnason wrote:
Ok, the commands behave like makefile rules, once run they don't run
again.
But there are still several issues here:
Remember that I said that my goal with 'bdist_deb' was for users to
have a
SINGLE command to generate a .deb.
What needs to be
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Olof Bjarnason wrote:
Ok, the commands behave like makefile rules, once run they don't run
again.
But there are still several issues here:
Remember that I said that my goal with 'bdist_deb' was for users to
have a
SINGLE command to
2009/9/28 Andrew Straw straw...@astraw.com:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Olof Bjarnason wrote:
Ok, the commands behave like makefile rules, once run they don't run
again.
But there are still several issues here:
Remember that I said that my goal with 'bdist_deb' was for users to
have a
SINGLE
2009/9/28 Olof Bjarnason olof.bjarna...@gmail.com:
2009/9/28 Andrew Straw straw...@astraw.com:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Olof Bjarnason wrote:
Ok, the commands behave like makefile rules, once run they don't run
again.
But there are still several issues here:
Remember that I said that my goal
Olof Bjarnason wrote:
2009/9/28 Olof Bjarnason olof.bjarna...@gmail.com:
2009/9/28 Andrew Straw straw...@astraw.com:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Olof Bjarnason wrote:
Ok, the commands behave like makefile rules, once run they don't run
again.
But there are still several
2009/9/28 Andrew Straw straw...@astraw.com:
Olof Bjarnason wrote:
2009/9/28 Olof Bjarnason olof.bjarna...@gmail.com:
2009/9/28 Andrew Straw straw...@astraw.com:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Olof Bjarnason wrote:
Ok, the commands behave like makefile rules, once run they don't run
again.
But there
Gerry Reno wrote:
What if stdeb only had the command 'bdist_deb' and had no other command.
I will not remove the sdist_dsc command from stdeb. I believe that the
ability to produce debian source packages is much more important that
the ability to produce binary packages which only target a
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
What if stdeb only had the command 'bdist_deb' and had no other command.
I will not remove the sdist_dsc command from stdeb. I believe that the
ability to produce debian source packages is much more important that
the ability to produce binary
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
What if stdeb only had the command 'bdist_deb' and had no other
command.
I will not remove the sdist_dsc command from stdeb. I believe that the
ability to produce debian source packages is much more important that
the ability
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
What if stdeb only had the command 'bdist_deb' and had no other
command.
I will not remove the sdist_dsc command from stdeb. I believe that the
ability to produce debian source packages
OK I'm sorry for starting some kind of battle here :)
I guess sdist_* stands for source distribution, and likewise
bdist_* stands for binary distribution?
Tell a rookie like me: what is a binary distribution of a python
application? It feels like an awkward concept.
2009/9/29 Gerry Reno
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
Andrew Straw wrote:
Gerry Reno wrote:
What if stdeb only had the command 'bdist_deb' and had no other
command.
I will not remove the sdist_dsc command from stdeb. I believe
that the
ability to produce debian source packages is much
Gerry Reno wrote:
Then I'm ok then with having 'bdist_deb' be the name and using the
plugin approach.
Andrew, what do you think about this solution?
It's already committed as of a couple days ago in the old-stable
branch and I just merged it into the master branch.
I'll release 0.3.1 (from
32 matches
Mail list logo
