On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 07:05:51 -0700 (PDT), Paul Boddie p...@boddie.org.uk
wrote:
No, it's the problem of the Pythonic packaging brigade that package
retrieval, building and installing is combined into one unsatisfactory
whole.
Brigade? That implies a disciplined and systematic approach..
I
Florian Diesch wrote:
.
From /usr/lib/python2.6/site.py:
,
| For Debian and derivatives, this sys.path is augmented with directories
| for packages distributed within the distribution. Local addons go
| into /usr/local/lib/pythonversion/dist-packages, Debian addons
| install into
Paul Boddie wrote:
On 26 Aug, 17:48, Jorgen Grahn grahn+n...@snipabacken.se wrote:
Well, if you are thinking about Debian Linux, it's not as much
ripping out as splitting into a separate package with a non-obvious
name. Annoying at times, but hardly an atrocity.
Indeed. Having seen two
On 27 Aug, 15:27, Diez B. Roggisch de...@nospam.web.de wrote:
You mean it's the problem of the python packaging that it can't deal with
RPMs, debs, tgzs, OSX bundles, MSIs and
put-in-the-next-big-packaging-thing-here?
No, it's the problem of the Pythonic packaging brigade that package
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 8:27 AM, Diez B. Roggischde...@nospam.web.de wrote:
Paul Boddie wrote:
On 26 Aug, 17:48, Jorgen Grahn grahn+n...@snipabacken.se wrote:
Well, if you are thinking about Debian Linux, it's not as much
ripping out as splitting into a separate package with a non-obvious
Robin Becker ro...@reportlab.com writes:
Florian Diesch wrote:
.
From /usr/lib/python2.6/site.py:
,
| For Debian and derivatives, this sys.path is augmented with directories
| for packages distributed within the distribution. Local addons go
| into
I was surprised a couple of days ago when trying to assist a colleage with his
python setup on a ubuntu 9.04 system.
We built our c-extensions and manually copied them into place, but site-packages
wasn't there. It seems that ubuntu now wants stuff to go into
lib/python2.6/dist-packages.
Robin Becker wrote:
I was surprised a couple of days ago when trying to assist a colleage with
his python setup on a ubuntu 9.04 system.
We built our c-extensions and manually copied them into place, but
site-packages wasn't there. It seems that ubuntu now wants stuff to go
into
Robin Becker ro...@reportlab.com writes:
What is the relation between dist-packages/site-packages if any? Is
this just a name change or is there some other problem being
addressed?
The problem being addressed is to maintain the distinction between
OS-vendor-managed files versus
On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 12:46:13 +0200, Diez B. Roggisch
de...@nospam.web.de wrote:
Robin Becker wrote:
I was surprised a couple of days ago when trying to assist a colleage with
his python setup on a ubuntu 9.04 system.
We built our c-extensions and manually copied them into place, but
Jorgen Grahn wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 12:46:13 +0200, Diez B. Roggisch
Well, if you are thinking about Debian Linux, it's not as much
ripping out as splitting into a separate package with a non-obvious
name. Annoying at times, but hardly an atrocity.
so where is the official place
Robin Becker ro...@reportlab.com writes:
I was surprised a couple of days ago when trying to assist a colleage
with his python setup on a ubuntu 9.04 system.
We built our c-extensions and manually copied them into place, but
site-packages wasn't there. It seems that ubuntu now wants stuff to
On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:20:35 +0100, Robin Becker ro...@reportlab.com wrote:
Jorgen Grahn wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 12:46:13 +0200, Diez B. Roggisch
Well, if you are thinking about Debian Linux, it's not as much
ripping out as splitting into a separate package with a non-obvious
On 26 Aug, 17:48, Jorgen Grahn grahn+n...@snipabacken.se wrote:
Well, if you are thinking about Debian Linux, it's not as much
ripping out as splitting into a separate package with a non-obvious
name. Annoying at times, but hardly an atrocity.
Indeed. Having seen two packages today which
14 matches
Mail list logo
