On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 11:02:30PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Sat, 01.12.12 09:34, Ramkumar Ramachandra (artag...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > > > Michael Biebl wrote: > > > 2012/11/30 Ramkumar Ramachandra <artag...@gmail.com>: > > >> Execute python using "/usr/bin/env python" instead of hard-coding the > > > > > > I'm not really a fan of using /usr/bin/env, as you can pick up a > > > random python version depending on how your PATH is setup. > > > Besides, you need to spawn an additional binary. > > > I would assume that pretty much every distro ships the python > > > interpreter as /usr/bin/python. > > > > I don't follow your reasoning: it is idiomatic to use "/usr/bin/env > > $interpreter", because every distro does not necessarily ship it as > > /usr/bin/$interpreter. > > Always doing two exec()s instead of one sounds suboptimal to me. Given > that this script is not supposed to be copiable to other distros, I'd > suggest to detect the python part as configure time (which we do > anyway in @PYTHON@) and rewrite the scripts to use that. That way, we > don't do the unnecessary double exec() and we have the benefit that the > scripts are executed with the same python version as was used to > configure the build tree, which I think is quite desirable...
I had a patch moving all .py files to .py.in and then "translating" them during build process to insert proper values of $PYTHON and $PACKAGE_VERSION (for --version and --help). Didn't post because I thought it is too much noise for little gain. I'll dig it up, clean up, and post here. Zbyszek _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
