On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 5:41 AM, Miroslav Suchý <msu...@redhat.com> wrote: > Clifford Perry wrote: >> >> Jan Pazdziora wrote: >>> >>> If you have Python in a weird location, you probably won't have >>> osa-dispatcher .py files installed in its PYTHONHOME, will you? So, >>> the first import which assumes that the python you run actually has >>> all the prerequisites installed, will fail. Alternatively, mixing >>> different pythons and libraries from different pythons might produce >>> weird results because symbols referenced in one library might not be >>> present in the library from that second python. >>> >>> We actually have (non-public) bugzilla about this very problem. I'd >>> argue that we should stop pretending that /usr/bin/env python will >>> work in the general case, any just put /usr/bin/python there. If >>> someone needs to run it with different interpreter, they can always do >>> >>> python /the/path/to/the/script >> >> I would prefer the hard code path to the python binary for reasons stated >> by Jan above. >> >> Folks - other than preference normally - please give feedback based on >> this above information. > > +1 > We do the same for perl already. > > If somebody have python in different location, he is on his own. If he want > compatibility he should create symlink from /usr/bin/python. > > If he do not want compatibility, then lets break.
+1 to /usr/bin/python. I agree that /usr/bin/env python is more generic, but seriously how often to we run it on non Linux systems? jesus _______________________________________________ Spacewalk-devel mailing list Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
