-On [20080120 23:36], Oleg Broytmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
PS. My python doesn't understand -s, so I tested a different options, but
the result is the same. There are Unix variants that understand many
options (I believe FreeBSD allows them) but most allow no more than one
parameter in #!.
-On [20080120 18:38], Oleg Broytmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
A shell has nothing to do with it as it is the OS (exec system call)
that upon reading the magic of the file sees #! and executes the program
(up to the first space) and pass to the program the first (and the only)
parameter.
Yes,
-On [20080120 19:34], Christian Heimes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Most Python developers should the meaning of ~. Should I replace ~
with $HOME for those who don't have as much experience with Unix as we?
The problem is that ~ is an expansion character. It expands the contents of
$HOME. If HOME
On 21/01/2008, Tim Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What would be useful is a method that generates (i.e., a generator in
the Python sense) the (continued fraction) convergents to a rational.
People wanting specific constraints on a rational approximation
(including, but not limited to, the two
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
% ./test.py
Unknown option: -
usage: /usr/local/bin/python [option] ... [-c cmd | -m mod | file | -] [arg]
...
Try `python -h' for more information.
Contracting to -Es works, aside from -s being unknown to my Python.
And also, /usr/bin won't work,
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 12:01:29PM +0100, Christian Heimes wrote:
The arg -Es may work because Python's arg parser doesn't recognize it as
two args -E -s but as the arg -E.
Thank goodness python is better than that:
$ python -Es
Unknown option: -s
usage: python [option] ... [-c cmd | -m mod
-On [20080116 07:15], Martin v. Löwis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I don't understand why they *have* to do that. I can believe they do
that as they don't know better - but why can't they use the Python
interpreter already available on the system, and just install additional
packages in their home
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Right now Python faces a lot of problems in the webhosting world because it's
tedious to set up and maintain for the webhosting user since they often have
to compile and install their own Python in their home directory.
I don't understand why they *have* to do that. I
Steve Holden wrote:
Maybe once we get easy_install as a part of the core (so there's no need
to find and run ez_setup.py to start with) things will start to improve.
This is an issue the whole developer community needs to take seriously
if we are interested in increasing take-up.
setuptools
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 10:13:44PM +0100, Georg Brandl wrote:
Since this bug day was a relative success, I suggest to introduce a
more-or-less regular schedule.
Feb 23 would make a nice second bug day in 2008, wouldn't it?
That works for me. I've updated the wiki page to give Feb. 23 as the
Christian Heimes wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
Maybe once we get easy_install as a part of the core (so there's no need
to find and run ez_setup.py to start with) things will start to improve.
This is an issue the whole developer community needs to take seriously
if we are interested in
Christian Heimes wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
Maybe once we get easy_install as a part of the core (so there's no need
to find and run ez_setup.py to start with) things will start to improve.
This is an issue the whole developer community needs to take seriously
if we are interested in
Steve Holden wrote:
Christian Heimes wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
Maybe once we get easy_install as a part of the core (so there's no need
to find and run ez_setup.py to start with) things will start to improve.
This is an issue the whole developer community needs to take seriously
if we are
At 01:06 AM 1/22/2008 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
Christian Heimes wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
Maybe once we get easy_install as a part of the core (so there's no need
to find and run ez_setup.py to start with) things will start to improve.
This is an issue the whole
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
At 01:06 AM 1/22/2008 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
Christian Heimes wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
Maybe once we get easy_install as a part of the core (so there's no need
to find and run ez_setup.py to start with) things will start to improve.
This is an
On Jan 21, 2008 3:44 AM, Paul Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 21/01/2008, Tim Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By useful I
don't mean lots of people will use it ;-) I mean /some/
people will use it -- a way to generate the sequence of convergents is
a fundamental tool that can be used for
At 10:48 AM 1/21/2008 -0500, Steve Holden wrote:
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
(Heck, if what you really want is to have easy_install support in
2.6, we could just as easily bundle an easy_install.py that asks for
an install of setuptools if it's not already present.)
Would the easiest way to do
Which is a shame. I agree with Steve on this - although I realise that
Phillip is basically the only person able to do the work.
Not the only one able - the only one willing to.
People shouldn't complain about the state of things if they aren't
willing to do anything about it (except
What I meant was that we could include an easy_install.py whose sole
function is to ensure that setuptools is installed and then invoke
the real easy_install. Thus, the first time you ran easy_install,
a current version would be downloaded, and thereafter the real one
would be runnable.
On Jan 21, 2008 1:46 PM, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I meant was that we could include an easy_install.py whose sole
function is to ensure that setuptools is installed and then invoke
the real easy_install. Thus, the first time you ran easy_install,
a current version
20 matches
Mail list logo
